BC Hydro has come out swinging against the Royal Society of Canada and 250 of Canada’s top scientists and academics that recently called for a stop to construction of the Site C dam, saying the group is being one-sided.

Royal Society representatives and academics did not take part in the environmental assessment process and did not seek a balanced assessment of the hydroelectric mega-project, says an unusually critical statement released by BC Hydro.

The dam, which will cost taxpayers almost $9-billion, will flood farmland and First Nations traditional territory in the Peace Valley to create an 83-kilometre reservoir.

A Statement of Concern, released by the academics earlier this week, asks the federal government to live up to election promises to respect legal obligations to First Nations and to make decisions based on scientific integrity.

Repeated requests by DeSmog Canada for comments from Energy and Mines Minister Bill Bennett have been ignored but, speaking to other media, Bennett criticized the Royal Society for being political and suggested members should have taken part in the environmental assessment process.

Ken Boon, president of the Peace Valley Landowner Association, whose historic farmhouse overlooking the Peace River will be flooded by the dam, dismissed that idea.

“That’s silly,” he said pointing to the many recommendations made by the Joint Review Panel that were then ignored by the provincial government in its rush to get construction of the dam underway.

“There were steps that should have shut it down and it didn’t make any difference,” said Boon, who is happy to see the academic support. Boon, along with several other Site C opponents, is currently being sued by BC Hydro for his participation in a protest camp. Legal experts have criticized the lawsuit as a threat to freedom of expression.

“This has had incredible media coverage and rightly so when you have such a large and distinguished group speaking out on the project,” he said.

Boon does not believe the provincial government is showing any sign of listening to the criticism, but his hopes are pinned on the federal government.

“In a lot of ways the ball is in the federal government’s court right now. It’s the government’s obligation to review those permits properly and then refuse to issue them if that’s what they deem is the right thing to do,” he said.

The Royal Society and fellow academics say the federal government should not issue any more permits for the project until there have been additional reviews and the courts have ruled on four legal challenges that have not yet been heard.

In its statement BC Hydro argued it cannot stop construction to wait for court rulings as its mandate is to meet the long-term electricity needs of customers and to build Site C on time and on budget.

“Court challenges of major infrastructure projects are not uncommon in Canada and they do not stop construction from proceeding,” says the statement, which points out that, so far, four judicial reviews of the environmental appeals have been dismissed.

Chief Roland Willson of West Moberly First Nation is hoping the appeal by scientists and academics will influence the federal government.

“It is frustrating when you have the premier of B.C. saying they are just going to ride roughshod over the rights of First Nations…But we have some ability to get the federal government to pay attention because the treaty lies with them, so they are on the hook,” Willson said. The West Moberly and Prophet River First Nations are currently fighting against the Site C dam in the courts, saying the project violates treaty rights.

“If they issue permits, then we may have to file another court case for treaty infringement.”

The Wilderness Committee is among groups calling on Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to consider the human rights and environmental impacts of the dam detailed by the academics.

“The federal government’s position is that projects like the Site C dam that were approved by the previous Conservative government will not be revisited,” said Joe Foy, Wilderness Committee national campaign director.

“This is an outrageous position and a slap in the face to those who have been demanding justice. B.C. taxpayers are being fleeced and First Nations’ and farmers’ lands are being flooded for this dam project — the government must do the right thing."

Image: Premier Christy Clark and Minister Bill Bennett/Flickr

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.

When B.C. Energy and Mines Minister Bill Bennett visited Southeast Alaska this summer, his aim was to calm critics of the province’s aggressive push to build at least 10 mines in northwest British Columbia, close to the Alaska border.

“I understand why people feel so strongly about protecting what they have,” Bennett said at a Juneau news conference. “There’s a way of life here that has tremendous value and the people here don’t want to lose it. I get that.”

What led to Minister Bennett taking such a conciliatory tone? An unprecedented outpouring of concern from a powerful alliance of Alaskan politicians, tribes, fishing organizations and environmental groups perturbed by the modern-day gold rush alongside vital transboundary salmon rivers such as the Unuk, Taku and Stikine.

Indeed, long-held perceptions of Canada as a country with strict environmental standards and B.C. as a province that values natural beauty have taken a near-fatal beating in Southeast Alaska, where many now regard Canadians as bad neighbours unilaterally making decisions that could threaten the region’s two major economic drivers — tourism and fishing.

Alaskans emphasize they are not against resource extraction, provided there are adequate environmental and financial safeguards, but believe Canada’s record — most recently illustrated by the Mount Polley mine tailings dam collapse — shows that B.C.’s regulations are not strong enough to protect downstream communities.

It’s little wonder Alaskans have difficulty trusting B.C. when it’s known that in the years leading up to the collapse of the retaining wall at Mount Polley, the provincial government permitted substantial increases in mining, beyond the design capacity of the tailings facility. Furthermore, in 2010, the government was told about cracks across the front of the retaining wall.

Yet when Alaskans asked for a panel review of Seabridge gold’s KSM mine, there was no response from B.C. and the mine was approved. That project will have a massive 239-metre high earth dam to hold back toxic tailings.

Subsequently, the Red Chris mine, close to the Stikine River and owned by Imperial Metals — the same company that owns the Mount Polley mine — was given the go-ahead with a tailings dam similar to Mount Polley — despite a recommendation from a government panel to stop using such dams.

When I started writing a 10-part series on these transboundary tensions for DeSmog Canada, I expected to be chronicling differences between environmental regulations in Canada and the U.S. — but I didn’t expect to stumble upon a vast difference in the treatment of media requests.

Over the past four months, I’ve submitted four requests for interviews on the topic with Minister Bennett. Not a single request was granted. Instead, I was provided with prepared statements to be attributed to a ministry “spokesperson.”

Reporters in B.C. are so commonly left trying to untangle this kind of government mumbo-jumbo that we’ve almost stopped complaining about it — which is what made the response I received from Alaskan officials all the more refreshing.

Phone calls to the Alaska government were met with the offer of an interview with Lt. Governor Byron Mallott, who is in charge of the transboundary mining file. The face-to-face interview was chatty and unscripted, giving useful insights into how the problem was viewed by the state and the probable direction of the Alaskan government.

Later, a cold call to Alaska Department of Natural Resources was immediately transferred to a senior manager, who answered all questions, including those on finances, and, unlike B.C. civil servants, could be named in the story.

B.C.’s response to media requests is perplexing given the increased importance for resource projects attaining social licence.

Bennett initially visited Alaska in November and provoked outrage by meeting only with the Alaska Miners Association.

His return visit was an effort to placate critics by suggesting an agreement between B.C and Alaska to give Alaskans more say in the mine approval process. But many remain unconvinced and there is a continued push for a referral to the International Joint Commission and for up-front bonds to cover compensation if Alaskan interests are harmed.

University of B.C. mining professor Marcello Veiga says if mining companies are serious about avoiding conflict they must establish a relationship with surrounding communities and then build up sufficient trust to reassure their neighbours they are not at risk.

If trust is the key to satisfying community concerns about mining projects, providing timely, accurate information and ministerial access would be a good place to start.

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.

B.C.’s approval of a new mine in a transboundary watershed has added fuel to simmering Alaskan anger about the province’s surge of mine development adjacent to the southeast Alaska border.

The province has granted an environmental assessment certificate to Pretivm Resources Inc. for the Brucejack gold and silver mine, about 65 kilometres northwest of Stewart and 40 kilometres upstream from the Alaskan border.

The underground mine, which has not yet received federal approval, will be close to the headwaters of the Unuk River, which flows from B.C. into Alaska. The Unuk is one of Southeast Alaska’s largest king (chinook) salmon rivers and drains into Misty Fjords National Monument, one of Alaska’s most popular tourist destinations.

Brucejack is adjacent to the large Kerr-Sulphurets-Mitchell (KSM) mine, which received B.C and federal government approval last year, despite strong opposition from Alaskan politicians, fishermen and tribal governments.

“It is too much, too fast,” said Chris Zimmer, Alaska campaign director with Rivers Without Borders.

“It is the cumulative effect of so many mines in salmon-producing areas. There is so much coming at us so fast without any long-term controls and the process is just not designed to look at cumulative effects over a big region.”

According to a Ministry of Energy and Mines spokesman there are 10 advanced mine development projects in northwest B.C. and numerous exploration projects.

Brucejack, with an estimated capital cost of $450 million, would produce up to 2,700 tonnes of ore a day, create 500 jobs during the two-year construction period and 300 jobs during a minimum 16-year operating life, according to a ministry news release.

Appeals from the Alaskan side of the border for a federal panel review of KSM were ignored, so there is little hope the federal government will veto Brucejack, Zimmer said. It is expected that the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency will make a referral to the Environment Minister by late spring.

Tension about the number of mines planned for the transboundary area, close to the Unuk, Stikine, Nass and Taku rivers, was already high when the Mount Polley tailings pond collapsed last summer, confirming the worst fears of Alaskans about B.C.’s mine oversight and permitting process.

The report into the Mount Polley disaster promised that it would not be business as usual, but that has not deterred B.C., said Heather Hardcastle of Salmon Beyond Borders.

One business day after release of a geotechnical report on the causes of the Mount Polley dam collapse, the Red Chris mine opened in the Stikine watershed. Red Chris is owned by Imperial Metals, the same company that owns Mount Polley.

Even though the report recommends that tailings not be stored underwater and behind large dams, Red Chris has started to fill a tailings storage facility that utilizes just that technology, according to Salmon Beyond Borders.

However, tailings from Brucejack will be stored underground and in Brucejack Lake, eliminating the need for a tailings pond and dam.

“This reflects the best-available technology as recommended by the independent panel that investigated the Mount Polley failure,” says the ministry news release.

The environmental assessment certificate has 15 conditions that the province says will ensure there will not be “significant adverse effects downstream from the mine and to the Unuk River.”

B.C has also asked for additional information on the effectiveness of the proposed water treatment plants and more modelling of local groundwater conditions.

That does not mollify worried Alaskans.

“To us it feels as if the pace of these projects in the transboundary region have accelerated, not decelerated,” Hardcastle said.

“We are frustrated. We want to see real engagement happening between B.C. and Alaska and the U.S. and Canada. We are downstream from all these (projects) and we take all the risks with no benefits … We want an equal seat at the table with B.C. and Canada to talk about the effect of multiple projects, not just project by project.”

Several groups, hoping for strong support from Alaska Governor Bill Walker, are pushing for a review by the International Joint Commission, established in 1909 as part of the Boundary Waters Treaty and charged with resolving transboundary water disputes between the U.S. and Canada.

But Canada appears to be balking at that idea, said Zimmer, who is irritated by suggestions by B.C.  Mines Minister Bill Bennett that problems could be addressed by a one-day symposium, bringing all parties together.

Alaskans also responded angrily last fall to Bennett’s message that they would stop worrying if they understood how B.C. mines are reviewed and how much input the Alaskan government already has.

“That’s pretty condescending,” Zimmer said.

“Bill Bennett tells us we just don’t understand and I think we understand too well.”

Image Credit: Brucejack mine camp by Pretivm Resources

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.

As we pull up to the mouth of the Hazeltine Creek, where billions of litres of mining waste from the Imperial Metals Mount Polley mine spilled into Quesnel Lake on August 4th, I’m thinking to myself what numerous locals have recently said to me: this shouldn’t have happened.

All of the warning signs were present that the waste pit for the mine was overburdened: employees raised the alarm, government citations were issued, engineering reports contained warnings.

It shouldn’t have happened, and yet it did.

And now local residents and First Nations will shoulder the full, long-term burden of the accident on the environment, the significance of which won’t be truly know for decades to come.

If you visit the town of Likely, B.C. (which you should because the entire region, much of it unaffected by the spill, is stunning and the locals beyond hospitable) you’ll hear a lot of support for the mining industry, but a growing frustration over irresponsible management and lack of oversight.

British Columbians should know, however, that less oversight and regulation is exactly what is being promised to the extractive industry at both the provincial and federal level.

In June Christy Clark recently congratulated Bill Bennett, B.C.’s minister of energy and mines, for ridding industry of ”red tape” surrounding new mining projects. According to a mandate letter, over the next year Bennett is expected to “encourage mine development across the province” and work with the Ministry of Finance to extend new mining allowances.

Bennett is also expected to “support the development of new mines and major mine expansions by working with industry…to ensure that BC’s mines permitting process is the best in Canada.”

Nowhere are more strident environmental standards, best practices, addressing community concerns or responsible development mentioned in the minister’s mandate.

On the federal level changes made to Canada’s environmental legislation in the infamous Omnibus Budget Bill C-38 also pave the way for less regulatory oversight as well as fewer and less-robust environmental assessments before projects are built or expanded.

Omnibus Budget Bill C-45, released soon after C-38, made massive changes to the Navigable Waters Protection Act, effectively removing 99.7 per cent of Canada’s lakes and 99.9 per cent of Canada’s rivers from federal environmental oversight.

The new legislation also makes it very difficult for citizens to participate in hearings (if hearings are even open to the public, which isn’t the case for the Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain expansion) where their testimonies can play a role in discussing the feasibility and desirability of a project in a specific area.

Under the new laws permits, like the ones Imperial Metals was obliged to obtain in order to expand mining operations at Mount Polley, can be approved without an environmental assessment. New mining projects and expansions are now positioned to occur without due scientific and environmental review or public input.

That means local residents will have less information and less say in the decision-making process about projects that stand to affect them the most.

The city of Kamloops is currently fighting the proposed Ajax mine, a mega gold and copper mine that would not only operate a massive tailings facility mere kilometres from the Coquihalla Highway but would be built directly on top of the Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain pipeline.

An accident of the scale at Mount Polley would be catastrophic so close to the city limits of Kamloops, the tournament capital of B.C.

In B.C.’s 2012 Mining Strategy, Christy Clark said the province is on track to meet its Jobs Plan target of opening eight new mines and expanding nine others by 2015.

The promise of expanded mining in this province is being made before appropriate public consultation and environmental safety reviews, not to mention adequate First Nations consent.

The push for industrial development appears top priority, no matter what the social and environmental costs.

Similarly the province is pushing for new oil pipelines and LNG projects that communities have explicitly fought to prevent or, in some cases, voted against.

The residents of Likely, just like many other British Columbians, have high expectations for both government and industry. But with the collapse of the tailings pond wall has come a collapse of trust, something I hope our provincial government and Imperial Metals will work overtime to rebuild.

If the breach of the Mount Polley tailings pond can bring anything into sharper relief for British Columbians, it is that our relationship with industry in this province is heading in the wrong direction.

If we want to avoid the caution tape, we’re going to have to rethink our perspective on red tape.

Industry needs productive, safe and enabling parameters to work within and British Columbians deserve to rest assured that our business leaders and elected representatives are engineering those limits right – with a foundation much stronger than that of the Mount Polley tailings pond.

Image Credit: Imperial Metals' Mount Polley Mine. Photo by Carol Linnitt.

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.