This article originally appeared on The Tyee.

Imagine if you lived in a nice quiet community of about 30 people, and the Chinese government got permission to plunk a $20-billion liquefied natural gas (LNG) plant on your doorstep.

Holy snapping duck shit! Chances are you’d want a pretty strong say in whether that could or should happen, under what conditions, with whose permission — and you’d want a very clear, objective analysis of the costs and benefits, and the risks, to you, your family, your neighbours, not to mention the physical place that would be so massively disrupted by such a project — you know, the place you currently call home.

Most of us don’t live in nice quiet communities of 30 people — or maybe we do. On my residential block in East Vancouver, I’d say that (based on the census’s estimated average of 2.6 people per household in Vancouver) there are 30 people on my side of the street alone. Maybe you live in an old apartment building with 30 people in it total; maybe a condo with 30 people on your floor. Anyway, 30 people isn’t a lot, but $20 billion is, and right now, on Digby Island — right across the harbour from Prince Rupert in northern B.C. — the tiny community of Dodge Cove is staring down a project that would pretty much destroy it.

It’s become a “sacrifice zone” — yet another bucolic corner of the world at risk of being flattened on the anvil of progress.

“This community has a right to exist unmolested,” says Des Nobels, Dodge Cove resident, long-time fisherman, diligent regional politician and a tired man with a tether whose end he is very close to arriving at. “They (the company planning the project) says we’re their only problem, and we assured them we’ll be as big a problem as possible.”

The company that wants to pipe fracked gas to Digby Island — home to the Prince Rupert airport, Dodge Cove’s motley lot, and barely a stone’s throw from the City of Prince Rupert itself — is Aurora LNG. Aurora is a joint venture between Nexen Energy and INPEX Gas British Columbia Ltd. INPEX is Japan’s largest oil and gas exploration and production company, and its B.C. subsidiary fracks shale gas in the Horn River, Cordova and Liard basins in B.C.’s northeast. Nexen was a Canadian company till it was bought in 2013 by CNOOC Ltd., China’s national oil company.

Nexen and INPEX want to build a pipeline to an LNG plant and export terminal they intend to build on Digby Island, near the mouth of the Skeena River. If that has a familiar ring to it, maybe that’s because Malaysia’s national oil company, Petronas, wants to do pretty much the same thing, terminating on nearby Lelu Island — where a mighty resistance has already been joined by some members of the Gitwilgyoots tribe of the Lax Kw’alaams First Nation. Petronas already has qualified with controversial approval to build its project (First Nations, and others, are contesting the permit in court). Aurora doesn’t have an environmental certificate yet but it is working hard to get one — and it could be mere weeks away from succeeding.

“Aurora has been very good at flying under the radar,” Nobels said.

While much of the media chatter about pipelines in B.C. has been about Enbridge’s Northern Gateway project (permit denied), Petronas’s Pacific NorthWest LNG (approved), Kinder Morgan’s TransMountain project (approved, also being fought in court), and Shell’s recent decision to shelve its Prince Rupert LNG project due to market conditions, Aurora LNG has been quietly undergoing an assessment by B.C.’s Environmental Assessment Office. Through what the boffins call a “substituted process,” the federal government takes a back seat, deferring to Christy Clark’s gas-loving government to objectively examine the pros and cons of the deal and impose whatever conditions it deems necessary if the project passes muster.

These approval processes typically cost millions of dollars. Aurora’s proposal has been in review for more than two years now, and in addition to the proponent and its galaxy of high-priced experts, more than 100 interested parties — the province, the feds, First Nations, local governments, a “full suite of the agencies” according to the EAO’s project assessment manager Sean Moore — have been poring over Aurora’s plans as part of a technical working group. Its work will be completed on July 8. By Labour Day, Aurora could be approved.

“It’s a pretty rigorous review,” Moore told me.

It’s a stitch up, says Nobels. “The province can do anything it wants.”

Behold The Allure of the Energy Megaproject https://t.co/Tnq3veVhG9 @Gillwave @TheTyee @discoursemedia #AuroraLNG #bcpoli #bcelxn17 pic.twitter.com/BjbPqk2pqO

— DeSmog Canada (@DeSmogCanada) March 21, 2017

The EAO review perforce includes consultation with First Nations, paid for by the federal government, which announced last December that its Participant Funding Program transferred $364,560 to the province to help seven First Nations groups evaluate Aurora’s project. The Gitga’at, Gitxaala, Kitselas and Kitsumkalum First Nations each got $54,040 from the government for the process, while Lax Kw’alaams and Metlakatla received $67,550 apiece, and the Métis Provincial Council of British Columbia got $13,300. The people of Dodge Cove? At first they were told there was no money for them. Then on the last day of February they were told they could have $12,000, but it couldn’t be applied retroactively to work they had done in the consultation process. The public comment period closed nine days later.

“An afterthought… an afterthought — if we were thought of at all,” says Nobels, He doesn’t begrudge area First Nations getting funds to participate in the project review, but in the case of his community “we basically volunteer our time, search for inconsistencies with what little technical knowledge we have, call in favours from friends… it’s an extremely onerous and lengthy endeavor which takes its toll on people who aren’t versed in all of this.”

Moore said he “cannot comment on the fairness or adequacy of how governments choose to fund public consultation processes” — that’s a policy issue, and the EAO’s policy is that it doesn’t fund public interest groups. He says local communities can rely on “all the agencies that are looking out for their concerns,” but concedes “there is probably a trust challenge.”

Yeah, just maybe. Especially when the province writes, as it did in early February, warning the North Coast Regional District that proposed amendments to Dodge Cove’s Official Community Plan — the only land-use process that gives voice to local interests — “appear to attempt to prohibit key elements of the proposed LNG facility development, in an attempt to render the project infeasible.” It warns that the province has entered into agreements that “provide the proponents with the exclusive right to move forward with the planning necessary to build LNG export infrastructure at their proposed facility sites.”

Brian Hansen, assistant deputy minister and lead negotiator, energy and LNG initiatives in the Ministry of Natural Gas Development, claims in a nicely ironic twist that the province is not being properly consulted with by the community, even though — when it comes to planning processes — “(the province) can do what they damn well want,” Nobels says.

In other words, there is a manifest lack of fairness any time big oil and gas, or mining, or logging, or any resource extractor with a commodity lust and some capital, comes to town. This is not exactly breaking news. For decades now, the Dodge Coves of this province — be they on Vancouver Island, Haida Gwaii, in the Great Bear, the Kootenays, the Cariboo, the Chilcotin, up north, on Burnaby Mountain, wherever — have been where the David and Goliath battles between industry and community have been inequitably joined.

The technical tables are always stacked against communities, which is why local activists end up resorting — in ways that offend the order of the bureaucratic, technocratic and legalistic mind — to public sympathy. Which is why they end up being called activists in the first place, because industry and their government sponsors prefer to restrict all activity to processes they control. Going outside the process to engage a battle for hearts and minds retains its potency for people who feel that the system renders them impotent. But while this route offers those who resist industrial projects a channel to protest, it also offers industry and governments powerful opportunities to deceive.

Primping the wares

Like pornography, the imagery that proponents of industrial development use these days to primp their wares is soulless, plotless, spotless, and hairless. (Mmm: note to self: that’s a good name for a law firm, or maybe a corporate communications consultancy). These days no proposal for an industrial project that threatens our environment comes without videos or television ads extolling the proponent’s almost childlike reverence for nature, its almost custodial sense of duty to nurture the ecosystems it is about to befoul, its solemn vow to mitigate any “disturbance,” its prophylactic commitment to safety, its championing of the benefits to everyman — the worker, and his or her dependents — and of course an almost prayerful obeisance to the betterment of Indigenous people.

See what I mean? This is Pacific Northwest LNG's rendering of its spotless industrial plant on Lelu Island.

Enbridge’s campaign ads for Northern Gateway were like Dove soap commercials, its depictions of the B.C. coast more suited to promoting a 10-day wilderness adventure in the Great Bear than what its project was actually going to do there, which was to bring tar sands oil to tidewater and clutter our waterways with tankers. Its scripts presumably were written by robots, since it defies belief that an actual human could come up with tripe like, “The first step in making things better is to be sure that it’s not at the expense of making other things worse.” That would be almost Hippocratic if it weren’t so utterly moronic.

Aurora LNG has produced some YouTube bling of its own, including animation of its Digby Island facilities (albeit set to music that would kill even the healthiest libido) that makes the place look like a university campus or a small airport with nice, tidy outbuildings fed by clean white pipes, which rather airbrushes the degree to which these plants are dirty, noisy, dangerous industrial sites that destroy local habitat and pollute the air with, among other things, greenhouse gases that we are supposed to be reducing. Meanwhile, the animation showing the impeccably choreographed arrival and departure of massive LNG tanker ships seems to favour blue skies and waveless and windless ocean conditions for which B.C.’s north coast is not exactly renowned. And of course whenever newspapers or television stations run stories about LNG plants, they illustrate them with company handouts of lovely neat, clean, almost always bright white buildings and pipes and tanks and rustless ships berthed at glistening docks. Is there not a photo editor left in Canadian journalism who might think to find an image of what these facilities actually look like when they are operating?

Meantime, after taking Aurora’s “facility tour” on YouTube, you can “meet the team” before viewing another video about your “neighbour of choice,” which might seem a bit ripe to people on Digby Island. Who is choosing whom, exactly? But what’s really curious about all these manipulations is that, other than letting viewers meet the team who are duty bound to say nice things because they are on the payroll, the illustrations seldom depict even cartoon people doing actual work at an actual LNG plant — surprising, given that every sales pitch about LNG features the promise of good, local jobs. Perhaps my favourite entry in the unintended irony category comes courtesy of Pacific NorthWest LNG, the Canadian front for Petronas, which has been at pains to promise jobs and other benefits to local First Nations, all the while assuring everyone that its planned operations on Lelu Island and nearby Flora Bank pose no threat to wild salmon. Check out their Current Opportunities page, scrolling down to look at the background image, with its echo of Toni Onley’s coastal scenes, complete with a fishboat christened — this is cute — Lelu. Note that the spotless boat has neither skipper nor crew, which probably wasn’t intended to be a comment on current or future job opportunities for local fisherfolk.

Aurora, unnaturally

Word has it that Petronas might move its loading docks away from Flora Bank to nearby Ridley Island, an already industrialized site. Lelu will still be flattened to make way for the gas plant — assuming Petronas goes ahead at all, market conditions being what they are.

Over on Digby Island, meantime, some of the locals probably feel like the ghost crew of the good ship Lelu. In the public comment period that ended March 9, almost 800 comments were posted, an overwhelming number (773 against, to 25 for) registering their opposition to Aurora’s plans. Many of the comments were generated via computer-assisted campaigns run by the Sierra Club and the Wilderness Committee, the kind of formulaic write-in responses that governments tend to discount as being biased and unscientific. Many commentators, however — including a number of people from Digby Island for whom that last-minute $12,000 came too late — posted detailed, sophisticated and often heartfelt critiques of the project.

To read all 800 or so comments, which I did, is to detect an air of fatalism in some of the responses, and a clear sense of distrust and despair at a process triggered by a proposal that came out of nowhere and that, even if it never gets built, has placed an unconscionable burden on a few people who have nothing else to draw upon except their love of place. One resident calls it a “death sentence” for the community, and another talks of “falsifying” of information presented on maps displayed at project open houses that didn’t even show there was a community of Dodge Cove on Digby Island. “It is ridiculous to wipe an over 100-year-old community off the maps to present to the public a pretty picture of where Aurora LNG wants to build,” the writer said. (In my reading of the comments, there was one Dodge Cove resident who thought the arrival of industry might bring with it a more reliable water supply, so community opposition is not unanimous.)

Aurora has done much to burnish its image. It even sounds innocuous. After all, Aurora is the Roman goddess of the morning. It’s also the name of the princess in Sleeping Beauty. It’s a town in Ontario. It’s a naturally occurring electrical phenomenon, as in borealis. And now, on the north coast of B.C., it is an unnaturally occurring industrial phenomenon that could also lighten the night sky, yet another flickering green light in Christy Clark’s gas-lit casino economy.

Will it happen? If getting a passing grade from a B.C.-led environmental review seems like an awfully low bar, perhaps low gas prices will function as a brake on Aurora’s plans. But Des Nobels isn’t so sure. “CNOOC have the supply, they are the market, they own the ships, they have all the capital in the world. The Chinese want the gas, they want to take it home and do things with it.”

If Aurora gets its permit, Nobels said the people of Dodge Cove can look forward to another couple of years of invasive exploration and site assessment and four to five years of construction.

“The net effect of all of the impacts will probably be enough to drive most of us out.”

And then those settlement-free maps will prove to have been prescient — there’ll be no problem community of Dodge Cove after all.

Image: Province of BC

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.

Between the Site C dam, Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain pipeline and the Pacific NorthWest liquefied natural gas (LNG) export facility, it’s hard to keep track of all the projects that have been approved in B.C. But for First Nations that will be affected by the Pacific NorthWest LNG terminal and pipelines, the environmental and cultural impacts are impossible to escape.

In what is now the fourth federal lawsuit filed against the federal government’s approval of the $36 billion LNG project, two Gitxsan Nation hereditary chiefs have filed a judicial review arguing that Pacific NorthWest LNG infringes on their Aboriginal fishing rights.

In October of last year, judicial reviews were also filed in federal court by the Gitanyow and Gitwilgyoots First Nations, as well as the SkeenaWild Conservation Trust.

The main concern? Salmon. Specifically, salmon stocks in the Skeena watershed, which supports Canada's second-largest salmon run. The LNG export terminal is planned for Lelu Island, near Prince Rupert, a site the federal government studied 40 years ago and found unsuitable or port development.  

“Lelu Island is an area that is very, very unique,” explained Yvonne Lattie, hereditary chief of the Gwininitxw house group in the Gitxsan First Nation and one of the plaintiffs in the judicial review.

“It has a pre-glacial shelf where the eelgrass grow, which is vital for the survival of the little smolts (a smolt is a salmon that is getting ready to go out to sea).”

Salmon need to get used to the salt water before they make their way out to sea, in a process that can take up to six weeks. This means they’re susceptible to changes on the Flora Bank, where Petronas — a Malaysian based company that holds a 62-per-cent interest in Pacific NorthWest LNG — is hoping to build off-loading terminals.

“If we do not have Lelu island, if we do not have the eelgrass, our salmon will not survive. Lelu island is vital in the survival of the salmon and in the survival of the aboriginal people that live on the Skeena,” Lattie added.

The Gitxsan First Nation has fished salmon on the Skeena for generations, but Lattie explained that since Lelu Island is not technically their territory, the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency decided the Gitxsan wouldn’t be impacted by the LNG terminal. Studies conducted by both the Gwininitxw house and Simon Fraser University contradict that assessment.

A study conducted by Simon Fraser University professor Jonathan Moore found that salmon on the Skeena River originate from 40 different populations, spanning more First Nations territories than those consulted by the government.

The First Nations have partnered with RAVEN Trust to raise funds to see the lawsuits through. Last week they held a fundraiser in East Vancouver where hereditary chiefs and environmental activists were joined onstage by Grand Chief Stewart Philip from the Union of BC Indian Chiefs.

Communities Divided by 'Secretive Deals'

Richard Wright, spokesperson for uncle Charlie Wright — hereditary chief of the Luutkudziiwus house group and second plaintiff in the federal lawsuit against Ottawa and Petronas — says the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency chose to consult with the Gitxsan Development Corporation, who Wright said have no aboriginal land rights or a mandate to represent the Gitxsan First Nation.

“Premier Clark’s secretive deals foster corruption and divide our communities but it will not avail her when our case gets to court,” Wright said.

The tensions sown within the Gitxsan Nation by the B.C. government’s push for LNG have been well documented by Discourse Media.

“They (CEAA) stopped talking to us and continued negotiating with this corporation,” explained Wright. “Afterwards [CEAA] says their study says that there will be little to no impact on the salmon, therefore little to no impacts on our rights. And that the depth of consultation will be very shallow. I said that was inadequate and that it was not up to them to determine to what extent the consultation process will go to.”

That’s when Wright decided to “shut down” his territory. He placed a large industrial gate on the only road coming in and out of the Suskwa valley, and built a large permanent camp.

“Since we've done that, we've been running youth programs out there, primarily focused on cultural revitalization and connecting youth to the land,” added Wright. He says he also started kicking surveyors out.

When contacted about these claims, the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA) reiterated that the Government of Canada stands behind its decision on the Pacific NorthWest LNG Project. They added that the decision to approve the project “was made following a rigorous federal environmental assessment with over 190 conditions in place to protect the environment.”

The CEAA also maintained that it consulted with Indigenous groups “based on the project’s potential impact on their potential or established Aboriginal rights or title.” Meanwhile, Pacific NorthWest LNG also says that it consulted with First Nations who are located closest to Lelu Island.

Wright and the rest of the plaintiffs hope that the judicial review will reverse the order of approval on the LNG project, and grant them the right to be properly consulted.

“We have the right and ability to manage our own rights and resources, and they're going to have to recognize that,” said Wright.

‘Our Salmon Will Not Survive’: Gitxsan Nation Raising Funds to Fight #PNWLNG in Court https://t.co/5ZdVO4jmAC #bcpoli #cdnpoli #Skeena pic.twitter.com/JbCewoUgU3

— DeSmog Canada (@DeSmogCanada) March 17, 2017

B.C. Subsidizing LNG Industry

Besides the potential harm to the Skeena watershed, some critics of the Pacific NorthWest LNG project think the project makes no sense economically.

“B.C. was late to the LNG race, renewables are cheaper now. But B.C. is subsidizing these companies as our hydro bills go up,” explained Caitlyn Vernon, a campaigner for the Sierra Club BC.

Even though the Sierra Club is not involved with the lawsuit, the environmental non-for-profit has been working to raise awareness about the Petronas project. The organization is about to publish a report about the B.C. government’s reduction of corporate tax rates for LNG.

“Industry is paying less than the cost of producing the power. And then it's hydro rate payers that are making up the difference,” explained Vernon.

“We don't need the Site C dam for existing power needs in British Columbia. We have enough power for our needs, so the only reason that we would build this would be to provide electricity to fracking and LNG facilities or for the tar sands. That's going to take 70 years to pay off and that's gonna mean increases in hydro rates for all B.C. So we're going to be paying for it.”

With a B.C. election coming up on May 9, Vernon thinks these issues will play an important role.

“This is an issue for all British Columbians, not just because of salmon or climate impact but also because we are going to be paying for these industries for generations through our taxes and our hydro rates.”

Photo: Freshwaters Illustrated

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.

The federal government’s approval of the $36-billion Pacific Northwest liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminal proposed for Flora Bank near Prince Rupert, B.C. violates First Nations rights and was based on flawed information, according to three separate legal challenges filed Thursday at the Federal Court of Canada in Vancouver.

Representatives from the Gitwilgyoots and Gitanyow First Nations as well as SkeenaWild Conservation Trust filed court actions requesting judicial reviews of the project’s approval which granted majority Malaysian-owned Petronas permission to build an industrial export facility atop sensitive eelgrass beds at the mouth of the Skeena River in a region scientists have identified as a ‘salmon superhighway.’

“It’s important to bring this forward in a court of law so that a spotlight can be shone on not only the deficiencies in the law, but deficiencies in the way the law was applied here,” Chris Tollefson, legal counsel for SkeenaWild, told DeSmog Canada.

Tollefson said the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency’s assessment of the LNG project did not properly consider the impacts of the facility on fish and fish habitat.

Flora Banks provides a unique resting ground for millions of juvenile salmon transiting from the Skeena River, one of the largest salmon rivers in North America, to the Pacific Ocean.

In its project application Petronas proposed to compensate for destroyed salmon habitat by recreating similar habitat in another location.

Tollefson said such there is no certainty this offset plan will work.

“Where offsets are being relied upon in that kind of setting, there has to be a high level of confidence that they can replace what they are destroying. We say the evidence simply doesn’t meet that requirement.”

Tollefson said the agency designed conditions for Petronas should the offsets fail to adequately compensate for destroyed fish habitat.

“SkeenaWild says that is going be too late. Once we realize they didn’t work, it may be too late. There may be irreversible harm.”

“These stocks, their fate hangs in the balance.”

The project was approved subject to 190 conditions last month by cabinet. Catherine McKenna, minister of environment and climate change, told Postmedia the federal government stands "behind the science in this decision.” 

“If legal action is taken we’ll certainly consider what next steps need to be taken," she said.

Gitwilgyoots Chief Yahann, also known as Donnie Wesley, said Ottawa’s approval of the LNG plant gave him no alternative to legal action.

“Once again, we are forced to ask courts to do what our politicians seem unable to do — to honour Canada’s obligations to its Indigenous communities, and to protect our environment from catastrophic harm,” he said.

The Pacific Northwest LNG project approval disappointed many environmental and Indigenous rights advocates who hoped Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s promise to restore nation-to-nation relations with Canada’s Indigenous peoples as well as evidence-based decision making would prevent a industrial project of this nature from going forward.

“Despite repeated requests, the federal government has failed to properly consult with our people,” Chief Malii, Chief Negotiator for the Gitanyow said. “Justin Trudeau promised a new relationship with Indigenous communities. Instead, he added insult to injury by ignoring us, and giving the green light to a project that will destroy our way of life,” Malii, also known as Glen Williams, said.

Chief Yahann pointed to a recent federal court decision that found the federal government failed to adequately consult with First Nations in regards to the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline project.

“As with Enbridge, and despite repeated requests that they consult with us, Petronas and the federal government failed in their duty to listen to the ancestral owners of Lelu Island,” Yahaan said. “We have never been opposed to development. But we have always opposed industrial development on top of the most important salmon habitat we have on our coast.”

Federal Government Hit With Multiple Legal Challenges Against Pacific Northwest LNG Project https://t.co/53FS4uBq1D #PNWLNG #cdnpoli #bcpoli

— DeSmog Canada (@DeSmogCanada) October 27, 2016

In addition to causing irreparable harm to unique salmon habitat, the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency acknowledged the LNG terminal will be one of Canada’s largest sources of greenhouse gas emissions.

“It will be one of the very largest single point source emitters of greenhouse gas emissions in the country if it goes ahead for the forseeable future, potentially for as long as 30 years, which is the life of the project,” Tollefson said.

The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency did not conduct a cumulative assessment of those emissions in light of Canada’s commitments under the Paris Agreement.

That larger, cumulative picture was never presented to cabinet, Tollefson said.

“We say that cabinet couldn’t therefore properly conclude that this project was justified under the circumstances,” Tollefson said.

“The outcome of this case will speak volumes about how our environmental laws respond to scientific uncertainty and the spectre of irreversible harm — and, more directly, how much our laws value one of the world’s most magnificent and abundant remaining salmon watersheds, and the livelihoods of the people who depend on it. “ 

Image: Federal ministers and Premier Christy Clark annouce the approval of the Pacific Northwest LNG terminal in September. Photo: B.C. Government via Flickr (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)

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.

The B.C. government’s decision to build the Pacific Northwest liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminal in the Skeena River estuary could have dramatic impacts on the second largest salmon population in Canada, potential affecting the constitutionally protected rights of at least 10 First Nations, a letter recently published in the prestigious journal Science argues.

The Pacific Northwest LNG export facility is proposed for Lelu Island, which adjoins Flora Bank, an eelgrass rich intertidal zone considered critical salmon habitat. The Skeena River estuary surrounding Lelu Island is considered a unique estuary system which acts as a nursery for hundreds of million of juvenile salmon each year.

The letter, co-authored by several scientists and fisheries experts from six First Nations in the affected region, says decision-makers considering the project, backed by Malaysian-owned gas giant Petronas, were uninformed of the ecological value of the estuary as a salmon nursery and its role in supporting salmon runs as far as 350 kilometres inland.

The authors argue the Canadian government did not sufficiently consider how the LNG terminal would affect inland First Nations.

True Scope of LNG Impacts "Not Taken into Account"

“We discovered that salmon from over 40 populations that are harvested in at least 10 First Nations territories rely on the Skeena’s estuary habitat that would be altered by the fossil fuel terminal,” Jonathan Moore, lead author of the letter and associate professor and Liber Ero Chair of Coastal Science and Management at Simon Fraser University, said.

“However, industry proponents and the Canadian government have only recognized the interests of a fraction of these First Nations, and have not taken into account the true scope of potential impacts.”

In the letter the authors state there has been “a striking mismatch between the narrow consideration of aboriginal rights and environmental risks and the true scale of environmental connections.”

“Salmon don’t care about boundaries. Degradation of salmon habitat can impact ecosystems and people as far as salmon can swim,” Glen Williams, member of the Gitanyow First Nation and co-author of the letter, said.

Last month the B.C. Liberals passed Bill 30, the Liquified Natural Gas Project Agreement Act, which opens the door to LNG development over the next 25 years. The Pacific Northwest LNG terminal is waiting on federal environmental approval, which is not expected until after the October 19 federal election. 

Juvenile salmon in the Skeena River estuary. Photo: Tavish Campbell.

Lack of First Nations Consultation

Donna Macintyre, a co-author of the paper, argues her nation, the Lake Babine Nation situated 350 km upstream from the estuary, could be negatively affected by the LNG project.

“The new data from the estuary is evidence that the proposed LNG terminal could pose risks to our fish and fisheries. Lake Babine is the largest of the Skeena sockeye lakes, with millions of adult sockeye returning in some years,” Macintyre said.

She added her nation was not consulted in the environmental assessment process undertaken by the federal government.

Chief John Allen French from the Takla Lake First Nation didn’t participate in the study but said he’s glad the research is being undertaken.

“We applaud this research and expect followup from Canada, B.C., and proponents of LNG projects to meaningfully address our concerns,” he said.

“We live in the headwaters of the Skeena and Fraser River watersheds where salmon are our way of life. We expect the environmental assessment process to take into account both scientific and traditional knowledge to assess the significance of impacts on our rights as Takla people.”

B.C.’s First Nations live on unceded traditional territory and have a constitutional right to maintain traditional ways of life, including hunting, trapping and fishing.

Development near the Flora Bank region could disrupt the salmon cycle, potentially preventing some First Nations from continuing their traditional practices.

“The Flora Bank region in the Skeena estuary is like Grand Central Station for salmon,” Allen Gottesfeld, of the Skeena Fisheries Commission, said.

According to Charmaine Carr-Harris from the Skeena Fisheries Commission, who published a paper on the high population of juvenile salmon near Flora Banks, field crews studying in the area have captured “tens of thousands of juvenile salmon in the area proposed for development.”

Lead author Jonathan Moore argues this information should compel decision-makers to rethink the project.

“This research offers an opportunity for the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency to use science to get the scale right so that they consider the true vast risks to environment and culture as well as economy,” he said. “The unintended consequences of locating this terminal in the Flora Banks region could have watershed-wide impacts.”

Image Credit: Tavish Campbell used with permission

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.