site created by noosworx.com
Licence Links
Submit
Licence Links
Submit
Teztan Biny (Fish Lake) Newswire
Licence Links
Submit
Posts tagged Fish Lake
Prosperity Mine: The More Things Change
Keeping Watch: Prosperity Mine - May 11, 2012
Helping oppose Taseko Mines’ proposed Prosperity Mine in the Southwest Chilcotin.
Ten Reasons Why *New* Prosperity Mine Proposal Is Not Acceptable
1. CEAA Panel Found Immitigable Impacts on Fish
The CEAA review panel process was very different from the BC EAO rubber-stamp decision. Its report found immitigable, devastating impacts to the local fish stocks and endangered grizzly populations, and to the existing and future rights of the Tsilhqot’in and its youth. Then Environment Minister Jim Prentice described the report’s findings as “scathing” and“probably the most condemning I have ever read.”
The CEAA review panel process was very different from the BC EAO rubber-stamp decision. Its report found immitigable, devastating impacts to the local fish stocks and endangered grizzly populations, and to the existing and future rights of the Tsilhqot’in and its youth. Then Environment Minister Jim Prentice described the report’s findings as “scathing” and“probably the most condemning I have ever read.”
2. “New” Option Worse Than Original
The company knows its new option is worse than its first plan. TML’s V.P. Corporate Affairs, Brian Battison, was clear in his Mar. 22, 2010, opening presentation to the CEAA hearings, when he stated:“Developing Prosperity means draining Fish Lake. We wish it were otherwise. We searched hard for a different way. A way to retain the lake and have the mine. But there is no viable alternative. The lake and the deposit sit side by side. It is not possible to have one without the loss of the other.”
The company knows its new option is worse than its first plan. TML’s V.P. Corporate Affairs, Brian Battison, was clear in his Mar. 22, 2010, opening presentation to the CEAA hearings, when he stated:“Developing Prosperity means draining Fish Lake. We wish it were otherwise. We searched hard for a different way. A way to retain the lake and have the mine. But there is no viable alternative. The lake and the deposit sit side by side. It is not possible to have one without the loss of the other.”
3. Water Quality in Fish Lake Will Share With Tailings Pond
The point was emphasised by TML’s VP of engineering, Scott Jones, who stated: “What happens to the water quality in Fish Lake, if you try and preserve that body of water with the tailings facility right up against it, is that over time the water quality in Fish Lake will become equivalent to the water quality in the pore water of the tailings facility, particularly when it’s close.”
The point was emphasised by TML’s VP of engineering, Scott Jones, who stated: “What happens to the water quality in Fish Lake, if you try and preserve that body of water with the tailings facility right up against it, is that over time the water quality in Fish Lake will become equivalent to the water quality in the pore water of the tailings facility, particularly when it’s close.”
4. Toxic Wastes Will Kill Fish Lake
This proposal does not address the issues that led to the rejection of the first bid last year. Fish Lake will be affected by the toxic waste and eventually die, and it will be surrounded by a massive open pit mine and related infrastructure for decades. The Tsilhqot’in people will not have access to their spiritual place, and the area will never be returned to the current pristine state.
This proposal does not address the issues that led to the rejection of the first bid last year. Fish Lake will be affected by the toxic waste and eventually die, and it will be surrounded by a massive open pit mine and related infrastructure for decades. The Tsilhqot’in people will not have access to their spiritual place, and the area will never be returned to the current pristine state.
It is not even new. It is “Mine Development Plan 2.” TML states on page 20 of its project submission:“Option 2 is the basis for the New Prosperity design…The concepts that lead to the configuration of MDP Option 2 have been utilized to develop the project description currently being proposed.”
5. The Panel Has Already Rejected This Taseko Mines Proposal
This option was looked at and rejected last year by the company, Environment Canada and the CEAA review panel. For example, page 65 of the review report states: “The Panel agrees with the observations made by Taseko and Environment Canada that Mine Development Plans 1 and 2 would result in greater long-term environmental risk than the preferred alternative.”
This option was looked at and rejected last year by the company, Environment Canada and the CEAA review panel. For example, page 65 of the review report states: “The Panel agrees with the observations made by Taseko and Environment Canada that Mine Development Plans 1 and 2 would result in greater long-term environmental risk than the preferred alternative.”
6. Review Panel Agrees New Proposal Worse For Environment
The new $300 million in proposed spending is to cover the costs of relocating mine waste a little further away. There is nothing in the ‘new’ plan to mitigate all the environmental impacts identified in the previous assessment. TML states in its economic statement: “The new development design, predicated on higher long term prices for both copper and gold, would result in a direct increase in capital costs of $200 million to purchase additional mining equipment to relocate the tailings dam and to move the mine waste around Fish Lake to new locations. This redesign also adds $100 million in direct extra operating costs over the 20-year mine life to accomplish that task.” In fact, this new spending is actually $37 million less than the company said last year it would have to spend just to go with the option that it and the review panel agreed would be worse for the environment.
The new $300 million in proposed spending is to cover the costs of relocating mine waste a little further away. There is nothing in the ‘new’ plan to mitigate all the environmental impacts identified in the previous assessment. TML states in its economic statement: “The new development design, predicated on higher long term prices for both copper and gold, would result in a direct increase in capital costs of $200 million to purchase additional mining equipment to relocate the tailings dam and to move the mine waste around Fish Lake to new locations. This redesign also adds $100 million in direct extra operating costs over the 20-year mine life to accomplish that task.” In fact, this new spending is actually $37 million less than the company said last year it would have to spend just to go with the option that it and the review panel agreed would be worse for the environment.
7. Federal Government Would Be Disregarding Constitution
The federal government is required under the Constitution to protect First Nations, which have been found to be under serious threat in this case, and is internationally committed to do so under the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. These duties are every bit as clear regarding this resubmitted proposal.
The federal government is required under the Constitution to protect First Nations, which have been found to be under serious threat in this case, and is internationally committed to do so under the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. These duties are every bit as clear regarding this resubmitted proposal.
8. Taseko Mines Would Be Proving Environmental Assessment Meaningless
Approving this mine would show the Environmental Assessment process is meaningless, and would demonstrate that governments are ignoring their obligations - as the Assembly of First Nations national chiefs-in-assembly made this crystal clear this summer in their resolution of support for the Tsilhqot’in.
Approving this mine would show the Environmental Assessment process is meaningless, and would demonstrate that governments are ignoring their obligations - as the Assembly of First Nations national chiefs-in-assembly made this crystal clear this summer in their resolution of support for the Tsilhqot’in.
9. DFO Has Already Rejected Project Numerous Times
The federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans has opposed this project since it was first raised in 1995. It soundly rejected it again last year. It has no reason to support it now. Nor does Environment Canada, which, as the CEAA report noted last year, also found option 2 to be worse than the original bid.
The federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans has opposed this project since it was first raised in 1995. It soundly rejected it again last year. It has no reason to support it now. Nor does Environment Canada, which, as the CEAA report noted last year, also found option 2 to be worse than the original bid.
10. Plenty of Non-Fish Mine Proposals In The Stream Already
There are many other more worthy projects to be pursued – the vast majority of which, if not all will require working with aboriginal communities. Natural Resources Canada estimates there is $350 billion-$500 billion worth of such potential projects in Canada. Governments, industry and investors do not need to go backwards by pushing this confrontational proposal and rebuffing efforts by First Nations to find a way to create a better mining system that would benefit everyone in the long run.
http://prosperity-mine-vs-fish-lake.blogspot.ca/2012/05/prosperity-mine-more-things-change.html
Taseko says WCWC defaming again
Stockwatch - May 10, 2012
by Mike Caswell
Taseko Mines Ltd. claims that the Western Canada Wilderness Committee has continued to publish defamatory messages about the company even after Taseko launched a defamation suit against the group. In an amended lawsuit filed in the Supreme Court of British Columbia, Taseko complains about a March 22, 2012, statement on the WCWC’s website in which the group once again falsely accused the company of trying to turn a lake into a tailings pond. The statement also gave readers the impression that Taseko was using the courts to stifle free speech, the company says.
The dispute between the parties stems from Taseko’s proposal to build the Prosperity mine near Williams Lake, B.C. The mine, if built, would cover the seventh-largest known gold-copper deposit in the world. According to Taseko, it would create 71,000 jobs over its 23-year life. The company has secured approval from the B.C. government to build the mine, but has so far been unable to secure approval from the federal government.
One of the more contentious issues surrounding construction of the mine is the fact that it sits adjacent to a small water body called Fish Lake. The federal government initially refused to approve the mine, citing the potential damage to Fish Lake from tailings. In response, the company has since amended the mine plan to move the tailings a considerable distance from the lake.
Environmentalists, however, remain opposed to the mine. They say it will endanger fish and bear populations, and they say it threatens another nearby water body called Little Fish Lake.
One of the groups opposing the mine is the WCWC. Statements that it made in opposition drew the initial lawsuit, which Taseko filed on March 1, 2012. The company complained about messages on the WCWC’s website, in which the group said the most recent plan for Prosperity would still put toxins into Fish Lake and Little Fish Lake. The company complained that its mine plan does not call for turning either lake into a tailings pond or depositing any toxic materials.
Taseko’s amended lawsuit
Taseko’s amended notice of claim, filed at the Vancouver courthouse on April 30, 2012, complains about several more defamatory statements the WCWC has made since the company initially launched the case. The statements, which were mostly issued through the group’s website, repeated the assertion that the Prosperity mine would threaten thousands of fish and would turn Little Fish Lake into a tailings dump site.
The company says that these statements remain false, malicious and defamatory. They give readers the incorrect impression that the company proposes turning a lake into a tailings pond and is indifferent to the deaths of thousands of fish.
Taseko also complains that the statements give readers the impression that it sued the WCWC to stifle criticism. Taseko says this is entirely untrue. It only filed the suit as a “last resort to vindicate its reputation” after the WCWC refused to remove false information from its website. “As long as the defamatory statements remain posted on the Website, they will continue to misinform readers all over the world” and will “have the capacity to cause unjustifiable and irreparable damage to Taseko’s reputation,” the amended suit reads.
The amended suit also adds the allegation that the WCWC acted in malice in knowingly publishing false statements with the intention of injuring Taseko. The company says it has informed the WCWC more than once that the statements on its site were not true. Despite that, the WCWC not only refused to remove some of them, it published the additional statements.
As with the original suit, the amended version seeks an injunction barring further publication, as well as damages and court costs. In addition to the Western Canada Wilderness Committee, the suit names as a defendant Sven Biggs, who works as the “outreach director” of the group from its head office in Vancouver. The suit was filed on Taseko’s behalf by Vancouver lawyer Joan Young.
WCWC’s response
Although the WCWC and Mr. Biggs have not yet responded to the amended suit, they did deny any wrongdoing in answering the original claim. In a March 23, 2012, response, they maintained that Taseko’s plans for Prosperity will result in toxic material entering Fish Lake and Little Fish Lake.
They relied on a the findings of a federal review panel that first looked at the project in 2010. Included in those findings was a statement by Taseko’s vice-president of engineering, Scott Jones, who said that the water quality of Fish Lake would inevitably degrade. “You might be able to delay that by moving the tailings facility farther away … but eventually the water quality will change,” his statement read.
The WCWC said the allegedly defamatory statements were based on the federal report. As such, they were not capable of being defamatory. Alternatively, they were fair comment based on true facts.
The group also called the suit an abuse of process. It said the true purpose of Taseko’s claim was to “curb the defendants’ exercise of freedom of expression to the extent it is critical of the plaintiff’s project.”
It asked that the suit be dismissed, with special costs. Vancouver lawyer Dan Burnett of Owen Bird filed the response on behalf of the group and Mr. Biggs.
http://www.stockwatch.com/News/Item.aspx?bid=Z-C%3ATKO-1957308&symbol=TKO&news_region=C
New federal panel appointed to review Taseko's proposed gold-copper mine in B.C.
The Vancouver Sun - May 9, 2012
Taseko rejects aboriginal spirituality in mine review
CBC News - May 1, 2012
B.C. company says changes needed to ensure federal panel appears fair and balanced
Bob Simpson’s on air Daybreak interview is linked to on this page.
B.C. mining company Taseko aims to ban prayers at hearings
Vancouver Sun - April 30, 2012
Children’s plays also targeted
Taseko Insists New Prosperity Safe
Prince George Local News - April 27, 2012
By Jeff Sargeant
Prince George, B.C.
As a public relations war continues between Taseko Mines and the Tsilhqot’in First Nation, the mining company says efforts to discuss its proposed New Prosperity project have fallen on deaf ears.
Taseko Vice-President of Corporate Affairs Brian Battison says while the Tsilhqot’in continue to voice public concerns about the long-term health of Fish Lake, the company’s new environmental assessment application ensures it will be saved from development.
“That’s no longer the plan, we’re able to save Fish Lake primarily because of the higher price for gold and copper that can sustain and help us carry that additional 300 million dollars,” said Battison.
Battison says the company has continuously tried to sit down with Tsilhqot’in leadership to discuss their concerns but they have refused to talk.
Taseko’s New Prosperity mine, south of Williams Lake, is currently undergoing a second federal review after its first was rejected over environmental concerns.
http://hqprincegeorge.com/news/local/news/Local/12/04/27/Taseko-Insists-New-Prosperity-Safe/
Prosperity information meeting packed Valley Room
Taseko Mines Ltd. investor relations co-ordinator Ainsley Hallbauer, left, answers questions posed by Stephanie Masun at the New Prosperity Mine project information meeting in the Valley Room on April 17.
More than 150 people packed the Valley Room in 100 Mile House to hear what Taskeo Mines Ltd. management had to say about its New Prosperity Mine proposal.
Brian Battison, Taseko corporate affairs vice-president, gave a half-hour presentation, after expressing his appreciation for the large turnout, which he later noted gives the company “confidence in what we are doing here.”
He began with a history of Taseko’s success in reopening Gibraltar Mine 20 years ago, and the previous Prosperity proposal’s rejection by the federal government.
“We have not given up on New Prosperity because we feel this region and this community has not given up on us. So, we will see this through to the finish.”
Battison also played a video detailing site plans for the New Prosperity Mine, including an employee camp, the tailing ponds and drainage, how the mine intends to preserve the integrity of the adjacent Fish Lake, as well as other aspects.
He then encouraged the crowd to show up and express support when the federal review panel comes to the community for input.
“And then, turn your attention toward Ottawa, and let the political leaders in this country also hear your voice.”
The “greatest value and benefit in mining flows to people” through mine employees, suppliers and communities, Battison explained.
He added if the “political, financial and commodity price risks Taseko has taken turn out reasonable and not overwhelming,” this will allow Taseko to reinvest profits in the province and have “perhaps even something” left to pass along to the “loyal shareholders.”
Battison concluded by inviting people to stay and ask questions of himself and the four other Taseko employees present.
“We are ready to talk about fish and Fish Lake.”
Obvious objector
Not everyone was pleased with what they heard, however, and one resident spoke up loudly with objections immediately following Battison’s asking people to bring their questions to Taseko staff individually.
Local resident Gordon Hoglund took exception at what he indicated were incorrect implications the project had been “railroaded” in the previous federal approval process, and other concerns.
Others in attendance respected the meeting format, however, and after people in the crowd voiced comments, such as “we don’t need to listen to this” and “when you rent the room, you get to speak,” Hoglund stepped aside to talk to Battison more privately.
Federal review changes
Joanne Molnar of 100 Mile says she asked Taseko environmental co-ordinator Sonia Meili about implications of the new, streamlined federal environmental review process to the New Prosperity Mine project.
“I was curious as to whether this submission of their project would fall under the streamlined process or under the initial process.”
Molnar says the answer she was given was the project will not be covered in the new process and must adhere to the previous review procedures.
Tailings pond design
Salmon Arm resident Georgette Clayton, who owns the Cedar Crest Garden Apartments in 100 Mile, also spoke with Meili.
“I was asking about why the tailings pond was above Fish Lake, because to me, it didn’t make sense.
“She explained it’s all got to do with the topography of the area. There wasn’t room to place the pond downstream, it was very steep, and it would actually then be closer to the river.
“So it looks like they’ve actually done their homework, and she said they’re trying to keep everything within one watershed, so it did make good sense and I was pleased.”
Federal review panel
Hills Health Ranch owner Pat Corbett said he posed several questions to Battison, all of which were addressed.
“I asked him what the construction numbers are. I wanted him to give me an overview of the dollars, jobs and valuations around the construction phase.”
Corbett says his key question was what Taseko would see as the “perfect picture” when the federal panel comes to the South Cariboo for public consultations on the project.
The presentation also answered his overall questions about changes to preserve Fish Lake in the newest proposal, he said, as compared to the prior plan to drain the lake.
“I think that was explained here. The new plan is better understood.”
Why are so many leaving B.C.?
100 Mile House Free Press - April 18, 2012
To the editor:
While it would be nice to turn all of British Columbia into one giant park, we must be realistic and try to find common ground and make the best of what Mother Nature has given us.
That includes a sensitive approach to harvest our natural resources and providing jobs to pay for our social needs.
Thanks to the native and environmental groups, Fish Lake (Prosperity Mine project) is now proposed to be protected, and at the same time we must congratulate Taseko Mines Ltd. for sticking with the project despite the huge extra costs.
Most people underestimate the economic benefits of that project for the entire South Cariboo region (and no I am not a shareholder).
B.C. needs a strong leader with a vision and the ability to negotiate the best possible deal for all our residents, including our native people.
We must negotiate an appropriate percentage of revenue for allowing the Northern Gateway pipeline to cross our province.
The United States is getting closer to developing its newly found gas/oilfields in North Dakota, so Canada must ensure an alternative market for our own products.
With today’s technology and safe guards in place, the risk of a major oil spill is probably smaller than the risk of an earthquake hitting Vancouver.
All the opponents of pipelines should start with disconnecting their thermostats in their homes, as they have not figured out yet, that without a pipeline, there would be no gas warming their homes.
According to Statistics Canada, in 2010/11, only 190 people, net, came to live in B.C. this compares to a net gain of 14,000 people annually from 2006 to 2008.
How does B.C. reverse the population exodus?
It starts with encouraging resource jobs by cutting red tape and taxes that stunt business development.
The latest migration numbers are a wake-up call that B.C. must be more than just a pretty face.
http://www.100milefreepress.net/opinion/letters/147834815.html
