RIVERS WITHOUT BORDERS

Fuel Spill Near the Iskut River Highlights Spill Risks to Pacific Salmon

Salmon and hydrocarbons don’t mix. That’s common sense, but with pipelines, mines, hydroelectric projects, new roads and increased industrial traffic proposed for northwest British Columbia, there’s a growing risk of industrial accidents and oil and gas spills in the region. A recent fuel spill near the Iskut River highlights that risk. The spill also reveals that both provincial and federal governments have gutted their environmental protection agencies, and are not adequately prepared to meet the growing threat to water quality and salmon habitat.

Confluence of the broad outwash plain of Hoodoo Creek and the Lower Iskut River looking downstream on the Iskut. Photo by Jim Bourquin

The spill occurred on November 16, 2011. There was no government or industry press release about the spill, and Rivers Without Borders only recently heard about it from people working in the region. Subsequent calls to government officials and other interested parties revealed more details.

Here’s what happened: a loaded fuel truck and trailer bound for AltaGas’ Forrest Kerr hydroelectric project, west of Bob Quinn, lost control on a steep hill and crashed against a rock wall at kilometer 12 on the Eskay Creek road, spilling 9,300 litres of winter diesel near the Iskut River. Chemicals such as benzene, toluene, xylene, and ethylbenzene are hazardous components of diesel spills. Investigators at the scene believe the diesel drained into cracks in the rock, possibly straight into groundwater. No fuel has been recovered.

The spill is currently “under investigation”. In B.C., that’s not reassuring. Even though there are no immediate threats to human health, and hydrocarbons have not yet been detected in water, here are four things revealed by an investigation into the Forrest Kerr fuel spill, which should concern everyone in the region:

1)      The B.C. Government Doesn’t Have Your Back – Due to provincial government cutbacks, there’s only one Environmental Emergency Response Officer, based in Smithers, for the entire region of northwest BC. That means that from Atlin to Haida Gwaii to Burns Lake – an enormous area – one single person is tasked with responding to spills on behalf of the province. Given the amount of proposed new industrial projects in northwest BC, unless the province hired Superman, they didn’t hire enough people to do the job.

2)      The Federal Government Doesn’t Have Your Back – When it comes to spills of hazardous materials such as oil and gas, Environment Canada is responsible for handing out fines, prosecuting environmental violations, and enforcing the Canadian Environmental Protection Act. This is the same ministry that just cut 60 scientists from its staff. A Globe and Mail article pointed out that in a recent seven year stretch, across the entire country, Environment Canada nailed down only 32 convictions, less than five a year. Either Canada is a place where industrial accidents, and environmental violations, almost never happen, or the government is willfully blind and not interested in looking.

3)      In Northwest B.C., The Liability Is Likely To Fall On The Little Guy – Potential liability for a spill like the Forrest Kerr fuel spill falls on the company, in this case Northwest Fuels, that had “care and control” of the fuel at the time of the accident. That’s the ‘polluter pays’ principle, and it sounds good in theory. In practice, it means a local contractor, based in Terrace, is on the hook for hiring a private consulting company to do environmental monitoring, and for potential clean up and remediation costs. At the same time, the large Calgary based corporation, AltaGas, which contracted Northwest Fuels to do the job, bears no legal responsibility for the spill. Future accidents – and there will be future accidents – will likely have similar outcomes: the financial burden of a cleanup will fall on small business owners in northwest British Columbia, not on the corporations that will construct and operate the giant mines and hydroelectric projects.

4)      Wild Pacific Salmon Are In Danger – Mines, pipelines, and other industrial projects are planned for northwest BC, and the Forrest Kerr fuel spill is likely just the start of things to come. If these projects go ahead, watersheds with vast roadless areas, clean water, and pristine salmon habitat will be intercut with new roads and industrial infrastructure. For salmon, it’s the Death of a Thousand Cuts. The degradation of salmon habitat in rivers like the Unuk, Iskut, and Stikine will be inevitable, and the threat of water contamination from a fuel spill will always be there. Norm Fallows, the BC Environmental Emergency Response Officer based in Smithers, said that in northeast BC, which has been hammered by gas drilling activity, there’s “a spill every day,” and, “anything less than 5,000 litres is considered not worth checking out”. A similar situation may be coming to the northwest corner of the province, and that would be a real shame: salmon can’t handle swallowing a fuel spill a day.

Taku Again on the BC Endangered Rivers List

Once again the Taku, the wild ecological heart of the British Columbia – Alaska transboundary region, has made the BC Most Endangered Rivers List. The announcement was released on March 12 by the Outdoor Recreation Council of BC. Of the ten rivers selected for this dubious distinction, the Taku placed number 6. Given that a major Land Use Plan embracing all of the Canadian side of the watershed was completed in summer 2011, in large part to safeguard conservation values, it is unfortunate the spectacular, biologically rich Taku is once again on the list. Here’s why …

Confluence of the Tulsequah and Taku Rivers from the Alaska side above outstanding salmon habitat straddling the international border. Photo by Chris Zimmer, Rivers Without Borders

The Land Use Plan provides some important protections for the Taku. Until it was finalized, all of the 4.5 million acre/1.8 million hectare watershed – fully intact, virtually pristine and, not coincidentally, the transboundary region’s most productive wild salmon system – was open for development. Now a significant portion of the watershed, including the main stem Taku and its Inklin and Nakina tributaries, is protected. The Taku River Tlingit First Nation in particular deserves credit for bringing about this noteworthy conservation success.

But the plan allows a mining district within the watershed in what is, from an environmental perspective, the worst possible location. The Tulsequah River is a major Taku tributary, joining the main stem just before it flows into Alaska. There is a block of mineral tenures at this juncture. Small scale mining occurred in the Tulsequah Valley into the 1950s. The long abandoned mine site has been bleeding acid into the Tulsequah River ever since. The pollution is not sufficient to cause far reaching impacts, but it’s a vivid warning that the sulfide geology of the area, if disturbed by renewed, larger scale mining, will threaten downstream waters. The Taku’s best salmon habitat, a maze of winding streams and backwaters vital to rearing juvenile salmon, is immediately downstream of the Tulsequah Valley. And virtually all of some two million salmon leaving or returning to the Taku system annually must pass the Tulsequah juncture.

Here is where two mine projects are now proposed by Chieftain Metals. Efforts to raise capital and get the final project permits are advancing. Initial development work and road construction is planned for this summer. Mining at Tulsequah would undermine the conservation gains of the Land Use Plan. It will mean construction of a road through remote Tlingit territory, and industrial barging impacting river habitat. Water pollution problems will be inevitable. Operational failures – a tailings impoundment blow out, for example, by no means unlikely in a remote, seismically active, high precipitation region – could have catastrophic consequences to salmon habitat.

The Taku is at a crossroads as the Endangered Rivers announcement underscores. Mining can be initiated in the watershed, bringing the short-term profits of resource extraction. And with infrastructure in place, more mining development will surely follow. Or the Taku can remain as it is, one of the continent’s top salmon strongholds, a wild river sustaining fish, wildlife, and people that depend on them for generations to come.

Chieftain’s proposal – the only present threat to the entire Taku watershed – is on shaky grounds. Concern, and outright opposition, is growing on both sides of the border. Strong and concerted pressure can save the Taku, and ensure that the conservation promise of the Land Use Plan is achieved. We look forward to a time, hopefully soon, when the Taku does not make BC Endangered Rivers List.

Chieftain Metals’ Proposed Tulsequah Chief Mine Fraught with Risks and Uncertainties Says New Report

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
February 27, 2012

FOR MORE INFORMATION
Chris Zimmer, Rivers Without Borders, (907) 586-2166, zimmer@riverswithoutborders.org

Chieftain Metals’ Proposed Tulsequah Chief Mine Fraught with Risks and Uncertainties Says New Report

(Juneau, AK)— A report released today by Rivers Without Borders demonstrates that Chieftain Metals’ Tulsequah Chief mine proposal is fraught with financial risks and uncertainties. The report documents the involvement of some of Chieftain’s executives in bankruptcies and questions the reliability of mineral and cost estimates. The analysis also discusses potential permitting and construction delays, undeclared environmental risks, and economic returns to the local community. The report, Risk Analysis of the Chieftain Metals Tulsequah Chief Mine Proposal, can be found at http://riverswithoutborders.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Tulsequah-Chief-Risk-Analysis-2012-02.pdf.

Risk Analysis of the Chieftain Metals Tulsequah Chief Mine Proposal. Click on report image to see report.

“Based on this analysis, Chieftain Metals’ estimates of costs, minerals and profitability should be met with scepticism,” said report author Joan Kuyek. “This report demonstrates that Chieftain’s capital cost estimate of $365.3 million is likely underestimated.”

The controversial proposed Tulsequah Chief mine is located on a major tributary of the Taku River in northwest British Columbia, near the Alaska border. The Taku is the region’s number one salmon river. Alaskans continue to raise numerous concerns about the Tulsequah Chief project related to impacts on salmon and salmon habitat.

The report, written by mining analyst Joan Kuyek with assistance from Ugo LaPointe, B.Sc.H., a consultant in social and environmental responsibilities of the mining industry, analyzes publicly available documents, including Chieftain’s latest cost and mineral data. The analysis found that some major costs, such as road construction and decommissioning and site remediation, are likely underestimated. “The quantity of minerals that may be economically feasible to mine has not been established,” is another notable conclusion of the report.

The proposed mine access road route is through the traditional territory of the Taku River Tlingit First Nation (TRTFN). The recently-signed Land Use Plan between the TRTFN and the government of British Columbia requires an extensive consultation process and First Nation approval on any such road proposal. The report notes a history of TRTFN opposition to similar road proposals and also notes that the First Nation has made no decision on Chieftain’s road proposal.

According to the report, “There has not been a feasibility study for the mine with road access since 1995 that indicated the Tulsequah Chief project is economically viable. Two of the studies were stopped by the mining company when they did not show positive results. The latest partial feasibility study… indicated capital costs of over $500 million.” SRK produced a Preliminary Economic Assessment of the Tulsequah Chief in June 2011. A formal feasibility study is expected in April.

Previous attempts to re-open the Tulsequah Chief by Redcorp ended in bankruptcy in 2009, resulting in losses to secured creditors of about $100 million and investors’ losses of nearly $190 million.

Rivers Without Borders is a project of Tides Center and Tides Canada Initiatives.

Scientists Warn B.C. Mining Rush Would Harm Alaska and B.C. Salmon, Clean Water

For Immediate Release
15 November 2011

Contacts (bios below):
Jim Pojar, PhD – (250) 847-9429, jpojar@telus.net
Jack Stanford, PhD – (406) 982-3301, ext 236, jack.stanford@umontana.edu
Mike Fay, PhD – (907) 254-1902, mfay@uuplus.net
Tadzio Richards, Rivers Without Borders, (250) 842-8169, tadzio@riverswithoutborders.org
Chris Zimmer, Rivers Without Borders, (907) 586-2166, zimmer@riverswithoutborders.org

DOWNLOADABLE MAPS – Current Development within Northwest BC and Current and Proposed Development within Northwest BC

Northwest Transmission Line could spur multiple new mines, dams and coal-bed methane projects in pristine region known for world-class salmon, scenery and wildlife

Letter of concern about proposed development in the transboundary watersheds

Hazelton, British Columbia – In a letter to British Columbia Premier Christy Clark today, 36 scientists asked for her leadership to balance impending industrial development in northwest B.C. with the outstanding fish, wildlife and ecological values of this largely pristine region. Of particular concern are the impacts to clean water and salmon runs in B.C. and southeast Alaska. Spurred by BC Hydro’s Northwest Transmission Line (NTL), which has received environmental approvals, the rush is on to build mines, river-diversion hydroelectric dams and coal-bed methane energy projects that could radically transform the region.

“The consequences for salmon runs on both sides of the border could be devastating, yet Alaskans would see none of the economic benefit and have no seat at the table,” said Mike Fay PhD, a National Geographic Explorer-in-Residence who lives along the U.S. portion of the Unuk River just downstream of the B.C. border.

Among the well-documented impacts of mining is acid rock drainage, a chemical chain reaction created when discarded rock and tailings are exposed to air and water. The process can go on for decades at both operating and abandoned mines. Just one of the proposed mines, the Kerr-Sulphurets-Mitchell mine in the Unuk River watershed, is expected to produce at least 2.1 billion tons of waste rock and tailings over its lifetime. The B.C. government has failed to stop 50 years of acid mine drainage from the idle Tulsequah Chief Mine into the Taku, southeast Alaska’s most productive salmon river.

“Northwest B.C. is home to pristine, free-flowing rivers that provide some of the last, best habitat for salmon in North America,” said Jack Stanford PhD, of the University of Montana. “Unfortunately, we don’t yet have the baseline scientific understanding needed to balance ecosystem health with impending industrial development.”

The lack of science is accompanied by a failure of the B.C. Environmental Assessment Office to ensure energy and mining companies follow through on environmental commitments. According to a recent report by the independent Auditor General of British Columbia, “adequate monitoring and enforcement of certified projects is not occurring and follow-up evaluations are not being conducted.”

Furthermore, the B.C. government currently does not have an adequate process in place to assess the cumulative impacts of the multiple industrial projects planned for the transboundary region.

“Without an assessment of the cumulative impacts of this wave of new mining and energy proposals, the British Columbia government could unwittingly sacrifice some of the best salmon and wildlife habitat left in North America,” said Jim Pojar PhD, who spent 25 years with the B.C. Forest Service and is a member of the Association of Professional Biology of B.C.

Map of current and proposed development within Northwest BC and Southeast Alaska

The southern part of the B.C.-Alaska transboundary region is home to species of concern such as grizzly bear and wolverine, as well as caribou, mountain goat, and Stone’s sheep. The largely pristine Stikine, Iskut and Unuk rivers are home to runs of all five species of Pacific salmon, which support subsistence fishing and commercial fishing jobs in both B.C. and Alaska.

The scientists’ letter reads: “The scale and intensity of proposed development certainly will fragment the watersheds with roads, transmission lines, river diversion projects, and open pit mines. Habitat for salmon and other wildlife will be destroyed at the development sites. Cumulative impacts likely will cascade throughout the watersheds in the form of altered flow and temperature patterns, disturbance to wildlife interacting with roads, and reduced water quality associated with sedimentation and acid mine drainage.”

Water quality, salmon habitat, and salmon populations on both sides of the border are at risk. Currently no organization or government has addressed the huge scope of ecological and social issues at stake. “Before further development is approved,” reads the scientist’s letter, “British Columbia must initiate a comprehensive assessment of potential cumulative impacts arising from the multiple development proposals in the watersheds.”

Nearly a dozen large mining projects are proposed for the transboundary watersheds in B.C., including the Kerr-Sulphurets-Mitchell mine on a tributary of the Unuk River; Galore Creek and Shaft Creek mines on tributaries of the Stikine River; and the Red Chris mine at the headwater lakes of the Iskut River. A 195 megawatt river diversion hydroelectric project is under construction on the Iskut River, and numerous other hydroelectric projects are proposed for the region. In addition, Royal Dutch Shell has proposed to develop coal-bed methane at the headwaters of the Stikine River.

Dr. Jim Pojar has extensive professional experience in applied conservation biology, forest ecology, sustainable forest management, ecological land classification, and conservation, with a wealth of field experience throughout British Columbia. He is a leading expert in climate action planning in British Columbia. Dr. Pojar can be reached at: 250-847-9429, email: jpojar@telus.net

Dr. Mike Fay works as a biologist with the Wildlife Conservation Society and is an Explorer in Residence for National Geographic. He is a renowned conservationist who has brought international attention to pristine and threatened landscapes in Gabon, Congo, and the Pacific Coast of North America. A resident of the Unuk River in Alaska, he lives directly downstream from planned development in British Columbia. Dr. Fay can be reached at: 907-254-1902, email: mfay@uuplus.net. His website documenting development in the region is: www.unukriverpost.org

Dr. Jack A. Stanford is the Jessie M. Bierman Professor of Ecology and Director of the Flathead Lake Biological Station at The University of Montana. He has conducted research and education in systems ecology for 35 years with focus on rivers and fisheries including pristine Pacific salmon river ecosystems around the Pacific Rim. Dr. Stanford can be reached at: Jack.stanford@umontana.edu

###

Wild Pacific salmon don’t need another threat

“Pacific salmon just don’t need another threat.” So stated James Winton, a fish virologist with the U.S. Geological Survey. He was quoted in a Seattle Times article (10/19/11) covering news of two wild sockeye salmon smolts in British Columbia waters recently found by researchers to be carrying a highly contagious virus. The virus killed millions of farmed salmon in Chile, and it may be connected to Atlantic salmon grown in BC fish farms. It’s not known yet if it poses a threat to wild Pacific salmon, but that concern is very high. U.S. Senators have already called for an immediate investigation.

Rivers Without Borders shares the concern. Winton’s statement hits the nail on the head relative to what our organization is about. Wild salmon need wild rivers. That’s why we advocate safeguarding wild salmon habitat by keeping it intact and productive. And some of the best salmon habitat in the world is embodied in the transboundary watersheds of northwest BC and southeast Alaska.

Unfortunately, another “threat” to salmon in this region is looming ever larger. Rivers Without Borders has been challenging proposed mining on the Taku, near the Alaska – BC border, for years. Now the threat of development has spread to the transboundary Stikine, Iskut, and Unuk watersheds. Four huge open pit mines are proposed on the Canadian side of the border, along with associated roads and infrastructure, and more mines are under serious consideration. All the development and contaminated water that could come with it would be upstream of prime salmon habitat. And what may be North America’s largest run-of-river hydroelectric power complex is slated for the Iskut. Two factors are behind this impending development boom. One is sky high metals prices. The other is BC government’s decision to build a transmission line bringing subsidized industrial power into the southern transboundary region.

For our part, we will raise awareness of what could be lost, push government to consider cumulative impacts of the development it is championing, and demand an international conversation about the future of transboundary watersheds, especially relative to wild salmon.

Because one thing is certain. Wild salmon just don’t need another threat.

Taku River Task Force

After months of discussion and negotiation between Alaska bipartisan legislators, government officials, commercial fishermen, sport fishermen, property owners, processors, businesses, and other stakeholders, including Rivers Without Borders, a Taku River Citizen’s Task Force has been established. The Task Force embodies Resolutions introduced in the 2011 Alaska legislature reflecting these community concerns. Juneau’s legislative office made the official announcement of the Task Force on September 19th.

The Task Force will provide a public forum to consider the Taku and its importance to Southeast Alaska, assess threats to wild salmon habitat, and explore ways to ensure the long term productivity of the watershed. Potential Canadian mining immediately above the Taku’s premier salmon habitat, and the prospect of related barging and dredging, is driving the creation of this unprecedented citizen’s body.

The facilitated eight member Task Force is scheduled to meet in a series of meetings in Juneau this fall. It is to report its findings and recommendations to the 2012 legislature.

In addition to highlighting the Taku’s ecological and economic importance relative to wild salmon via a formal, legislatively sanctioned citizen’s body, the Task Force underscores that Alaskans care about the Taku, and that upstream activities on this international river could have downstream consequences. It should be noted that Task Force deliberations will only apply to the river itself, as opposed to the larger river corridor, and that traditional river usage will in no way be affected by any habitat protection recommendations. Concerns about river barging and dredging relative to salmon will figure prominently in discussions.

Salmon is at the heart of the Southeast Alaska lifestyle

An opinion piece today in the Juneau Empire by Heather Hardcastle, co-owner of Taku River Reds, and Mason Bryant, a retired research fisheries biologist with the U.S. Forest Service, highlights the importance of conserving salmon habitat to the economy of Southeast Alaska. The authors note, “The more than 5,000 salmon streams in the Tongass National Forest produce roughly one-third of all salmon caught on the West Coast…” They go on to say, “Continued high salmon productivity in Southeast Alaska is directly tied to the health of the watersheds that produce these fish.” This is especially true in the Taku, the most productive salmon river in all of Southeast Alaska.

As noted in a recent study, the economic impact of Southeast Alaska’s salmon and trout fisheries reach toward the $1 billion mark in local $, and 10% of jobs in the region. 96% of Alaskans recognize this strong personal connection to salmon and believe that the fish is essential to the Alaska way of life according to a recent survey reported in the Anchorage Daily News. The Taku River alone supports hundreds of sport and commercial fishing jobs and contributes millions of dollars to the regional economy.

As Heather and Mason state, “Salmon is at the heart of the Southeast Alaska lifestyle.” Conserving salmon habitat, and the watersheds that are an essential part of that habitat, is key to the economic viability of the region.

Salmon habitat and local fishing jobs in danger

The Tulsequah Chief mine is in the news again. After recently barging equipment up the Taku River, the Canadian mining company Chieftain Metals, its current owner (with ties to the former owner, bankrupt Redfern Resources), announced its intent to begin active development of the mine in 2012. With development planned so soon, there is little apparent option other than the river as the transportation corridor for this mine.

Jev Shelton, a Juneau resident who has fished commercially for 51 years and served Alaska on the Pacific Salmon Commission for 15 years, has called for a public forum on the plan to barge mining materials down the Taku River in a My Turn piece in the Juneau Empire.

The Taku River is the largest salmon producer in Southeast Alaska. As Jev says, “Maintaining that productivity is a matter of importance for the entire Juneau community.”

Full Fish Box?

The ad below promoting the significance of the Taku watershed relative to wild salmon recently appeared in the Juneau Empire and the Capital City Weekly. This is part of Rivers Without Borders’ continuing effort to highlight the potential Canadian Taku mining right over the Alaska border, and its associated industrial barging up the Taku river. These activities could diminish the salmon values that are of such economic importance to Southeast Alaska.

With the Atlin-Taku Land Use Plan now finalized and approved, leaving open resource development activity in the Tulsequah Valley, Alaska support for or opposition to Tulsequah mining may be a crucial factor in determining whether the reopening of the Tulsequah Chief mine moves forward in the Taku watershed.

Controversy Grows As Northwest Transmission Line Lengthens

The Northwest Transmission Line continues to generate controversy. Christopher Pollon has written an excellent article in the Tyee which highlights some of this controversy.

As part of paying for the estimated $404 million cost of the NTL in BC, the Canadian federal government will contribute $130 million of taxpayers’ money out of its Green Infrastructure Fund. In return, BC is committed to extending the NTL past its current end point of Bob Quinn Lake up to Iskut, a remote village currently powered by diesel generated electricity.

As you’d expect, the Green Infrastructure Fund is supposed to “improve the quality of the environment” and “contribute to improved air quality and lower carbon emissions.” But the NTL, along with this extension, is really about powering mine development in northwest BC. A 2008 Pembina Institute memo predicts that if the mines currently proposed to connect to the NTL are developed, they will generate “greenhouse gas pollution” trucking ore to ports and shipping it to Asian smelters at a level more than 300 times the amount saved by providing grid power to Iskut.

BC Hydro map of planned NTL line shows it ending at Bob Quinn, but an agreement between BC and the federal government requires an extension to Iskut. (Click for larger image.)

In addition, the $130 million is being used to pay for a piece of the current NTL. But who will pay for  the required extension? There isn’t a design, a cost estimate, a time frame or an environmental assessment for the extension even though it is part of the BC-Canadian NTL agreement announced in 2009.

The mines will buy “green” power from BC Hydro which will supply hydroelectricity from the AltaGas run-of-river complex along the Iskut river. But BC Hydro has agreed to buy that power from AltaGas for 60 years at prices significantly higher than the expected rates that the mining companies will pay, driving up electricity rates for the rest of BC Hydro’s customers to cover the loss.

There are significant questions that need to be asked about the NTL and its required extension. Otherwise, BC Hydro ratepayers and Canadian taxpayers may find they have a huge bill facing them.

Click here for more information about the Northwest Transmission Line project.