RIVERS WITHOUT BORDERS

Posted In: Taku

BC and Canada Retreat to the Backrooms … Again

With all the controversy that has dogged the Tulsequah Chief mine project proposed for the Taku River watershed, you would think that the governments of British Columbia and Canada would have learned the value of openness and transparency. Instead, with a new proposal on the table to access the mine by barge, they are resorting again to closed door, back room tactics in an apparent effort to keep the public in the dark. Earlier this month, they refused to let Rivers Without Borders attend meetings between government and industry that were intended to frame the oversight of that new proposal. Alaskan officials, by contrast, welcomed RWB to meetings held in Juneau on the same proposal.

Redcorp Ventures put a new proposal on the table in January of this year, saying that they wanted to amend their environmental assessment approvals from 2002 (BC) and 2005 (Canada)  to allow them to build a road from the Tulsequah Chief mine down to the mainstem Taku River and from their haul mineral concentrate down the Taku River and on to Juneau, Alaska on "hoverbarges" towed by "amphitrac" amphibious vehicles.

The proposal raises a lot of serious questions about possible impacts to fish, wildlife and water quality. Rivers Without Borders asked to be part of meetings that BC, Canada and the company held in May, fully expecting that we would be welcome. In 2002 we were part of the technical team in the Environmental Assessment of the Forrest Kerr hydro project in the Iskut-Stikine watershed and our technical submissions to the Tulsequah Chief assessment in 2004 had been identified by a Fisheries and Oceans Canada as including "strategic issues that warrant resolution with Redfern prior to completion of the CEAA review."

The British Columbia government’s commitment to approving the Tulsequah Chief mine at all costs has consistently undermined efforts to accurately assess the impacts of the Tulsequah Chief mine. Their 2002 approval was rife with inconsistencies and  outright errors. Despite good work by individual Canadian federal scientists and specialists, Canada ignored the concerns of over 4000 concerned members of the public and instead bowed to pressure from BC and in coming to the baseless conclusion that building a 160 kilometer road into the heart of the pristine Taku watershed would have no lasting environmental impacts whatsoever.

Canada’s actions in its 2005 assessment of the Tulsequah Chief mine prompted noted ecologist Dr. Daniel Botkin to comment:

"In my 40 years experience as a biologist dealing with environmental issues, I have usually found that the issues are complex and subtle, and one can understand the positions taken on both sides.  Such is not the case here.  Never have I come across an issue in which the government response so blatantly ignores simple and obvious facts and conditions. Never has a case been so clear nor the response of a government agency so misguided and inappropriate."

Judging by BC and Canada’s recent decision to hide behind closed doors at the crucial initial stage of this amendment to the earlier environmental assessment, I fear that we may be in for more of the same in the coming months. Rivers Without Borders will proceed with its own technical analysis of the barge proposal and you can be assured that we will share it openly with the public. Return to our site often for updates!