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

Wilderness Committee - March 2, 2012

Taseko Mines filed a Notice of Civil Claim against the Wilderness Committee yesterday afternoon for what the mining company says is a series of false and defamatory statements concerning Taseko and its proposed gold-copper mine at Little Fish Lake and Fish Lake in the heart of Tsilhqot’in Nation territory.

“We are very disappointed that this mining company has chosen litigation instead of fair and open public debate,” said Joe Foy, National Campaign Director for the Wilderness Committee. “We believe this court action stifles fair comment about Taseko’s environmentally risky mine proposal. People should be able to enjoy full participation in the Federal Environmental Review process, including the right to comment – without fear of time-consuming and costly litigation.”

Foy declared that the Wilderness Committee would continue to vigorously speak out about the severe risks of Taseko’s proposed mine and encouraged people to check out the Wilderness Committee’s website.

“This ill-conceived mine proposal should be turned down once and for all. That’s our view and we’re standing by it,” said Foy.

Contact:

For more information please contact: Joe Foy (604) 880-2580

http://wildernesscommittee.org/press_release/taseko_mines_threatens_court_action_putting_damper_public_debate

Sierra Club of BC - February 16, 2012

Xeni Gwet’in Chief Marilyn Baptiste noted Taseko Mines Ltd has also been distributing erroneous and misleading information to media in support of its own injunction aimed at gaining entry to the lands to build its roads and test sites.  “It has questioned our respect for the law, but the reality is the Tsilhqot’in Nation has worked with and through the legal system to defend our rights and positions and continue to place our expectations on the law and the Canadian Constitution to defend our rights,” said Chief Baptiste.

“We continue to seek to avoid confrontation and to work through the courts to ensure that illegally granted provincial permits are not used to allow extensive damage in pursuit of an option that has already been found by the company and Environment Canada to be worse than the preferred option, which itself was rejected by Ottawa based on the “scathing” and “condemning” findings of a Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency’s review panel.

Chief Alphonse said: “It is also important to note that we were prepared to talk with the company about moving forward - if it assured us that it had not already chosen a new plan and would be proceeding with it regardless of anything we might say. The company did not provide such an assurance.”

The TNG and the TML injunction applications will be heard starting on Monday, November 28 at 10 am in the British Columbia Supreme Court, in Vancouver (Hornby St. & Nelson St.), and supporters will gather outside the court beginning at 9am, with Chief Baptiste in attendance. 

Chief Baptiste: “We encourage all peoples to join us outside the court with drums and prayers, and to do the same in your respective territories wherever you may be.  This is for the protection of all our lands and waters.”

Media contact:

 Chief Joe Alphonse 250-394-4212

 Chief Marilyn Baptiste 250-267-1401

Salmon Guy Blog - November 8, 2011

_ _ _ _ _

Here we go… all over again.

For the first time in the history of the Canadian Environmental Assessment (CEA) process — a project outright rejected because of its many potential negative impacts (environmental and social), gets a second chance.

Globe & Mail:

Controversial Prosperity mine proposal gets second chance

Montreal Gazette:

Kent criticized over second review of huge B.C. mine proposal

Well… now it seems after rejection the first time through… that they’ve changed their tune…

Why?

Simply… because the price of gold and copper are soaring.

Well… what happens when those prices crash again?

They don’t call it a “commodity cycle” for nothing.

The whacky thing about it all… it wasn’t just the killing of the lake that was the problem with the original proposal. There were a slew of other issues including impacts on grizzly bears and so on. As well as social issues with the fact all First Nations in the area are opposed to the project — and in BC there are still no treaties after decades of failing, flailing attempts by bureaucracy — and over a century and a half of efforts by many First Nation communities.

_ _ _ _ _ _

New tag line for the Canadian Environmental Assessment Process…

don’t like the result the first time around… try, try, try again.

I’m sure there’s no link here with non-elected Premier Christy Clark and newly elected majority Harper — and the BC “jobs plan”… otherwise known as the plan for “short term gain, for long-term pain“.

http://www.salmonguy.org/?p=4576

Pacific Free Press - October 19, 2011

The Prosperity Mine issue has been re-opened with a vengeance!

by FONVHello All Friends of Friends of the Nemaiah Valley: At this moment Tsilhqotin National Government (TNG) Tribal Chair Joe Alphonse, Tsilhqot’in Chiefs Marilyn Baptiste and Frances Laceese, along with Grand Chief Stuart Phillip of the Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs, are in Ottawa. They are accompanied by Councillor Roger William and TNG staff and expect to be joined by Regional Chief Jody Wilson-Raybould of the National Assembly of First Nations.
Federal officials meet with Tsilhqot’in leaders and band members at Yanah Biny/Little Fish Lake earlier this month (Nate Einbinder)

They will be holding a Press conference in the Parliamentary Press Gallery following meetings with federal ministers and deputy ministers, as well as staff of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, as they try to prevent any further time and money being spent on this very flawed proposal.

TNG News Release Here: cnw.ca/WG7X

Once again, the Tsilhqot’in people find themselves fighting this battle despite the fact that the federal government has found this mine to be unacceptable on many grounds and that it has been consistently opposed by the Tslhqot’in people and non-government organizations like FONV and an overwhelming portion of the public,
Taseko Mines Ltd. (TML) is trumpeting that the new proposal will “save” Teztan Biny/Fish Lake, will answer the concerns the original CEAA Panel had with regard to grizzly bears, and will create many billions of dollars revenue for the government.

The truth lies elsewhere. The “New” Prosperity Mine is nothing more than Alternative #2 that has already been determined to be environmentally worse than the original proposal. Taseko itself said that it was worse and the Panel agreed. This is well documented. Alternative #2 will destroy Yanah Biny/Little Fish Lake, Fish Creek and the entire Nabas region as a viable, functioning ecosystem. It will eliminate 81% of Teztan Biny’s spawning habitat.

Furthermore,at the end of the proposed life of the mine in 21 years, 50% of the resource (gold and copper) will still be in the ground, much of it under Teztan Biny. At that point, Teztan Biny will have to be destroyed to get at the ore and this will then become a 33 year mine. Taseko admitted as much during the last round of hearings:

“As commodity prices increase, as the potential pit increases, it increases out, radially out towards the lake. So that as commodity prices increase…..you reach a point where you actually impact Fish Lake and you lose Fish Lake….And then maximizing the extraction of the resource, you’ve lost the lake.” (Scott Jones, V.P. Engineering, TML).

New claims by Taseko of huge economic benefits appear to be based on highly speculative estimates of growth in which indirect spending accounts for over 50% of the projected benefits. We became used to this from this company during the last go ‘round when wild and ever increasing claims went unexamined by government and were finally punctured by economist Dr. Marvin Shaffer. Neither do Taseko figures take into account the very real economic losses that will ensue to a growing wilderness tourism industry and the potentially huge losses to our fisheries as the mine is located at the Fraser River headwaters.

A legacy of this mine will be tragic cultural loss for Tsilhqot’in people and social disorder in the form of 500 and more miners imposed on a small and remote community. In 33 years most of the people who will then be “allowed” to return to the area for the food resources and cultural practices they have carried on there for millenia will have joined their ancestors, some of whom are buried where this mine will be.

The new mine does nothing to mitigate the loss of grizzly habitat, nor does it respect the rights of Tsilhqot’in people whose rights and title case was appealed a year ago. A decision by the B.C. Court of Appeal is imminent. This may grant title to this area or, at the least, confirm the aboriginal rights that Justice Vickers found pertained here almost exactly four years ago.  Meanwhile, Taseko continues to ask for road building and tree clearing permits all around Teztan Biny before any review commences.

The federal government has just announced severe cuts to the CEAA under a new round of economic restraint. Does it make sense to now embark on a costly enterprise to re-examine a mine proposal that has already been determined to be environmentally unacceptable by this same Agency and by this same government?

It is clearly long past time for this company, Taseko Mines Ltd., to call it a day. They have imposed great stress and hardship on Tsilhqot’in people. They have cost the public treasury millions of dollars in repeated attempts to push the mine through, all the time being encouraged by a provincial government whose own environmental review process has been proved to be little more than a rubber stamp to resource projects.

By November 7th. the CEAA will decide whether to grant a full environmental review – once again – to this project. We ask you to join us and other environmental groups across Canada in condemning this mine proposal by calling your MP and MLA and demanding an end to this charade.

OCTOBER 19, 2011
David Williams, President
Friends of the Nemaiah Valley

http://www.pacificfreepress.com/news/1/9976-return-of-the-fish-lake-gold-miners.html

Aug 30th, 2011 by salmon guy

Salmon Guy

Figure this one out… (is this not exhausting?… and expensive for taxpayers…?)

.

.

The controversial proposed Prosperity Gold project west of Williams Lake in BC is back into the federal Environmental Assessment process.

Last November, the federal government denied approval for this flawed open-pit mining proposal following a “scathing” (Jim Prentice — Conservative Environment Minister’s words) federal Environmental Assessment report. The report concluded that the project as proposed would have “signficiant environmental effects” and therefore should not be approved. The federal government (then a Conservative minority) agreed.

Environment Canada Nov. 2, 2010  press release:

the significant adverse environmental effects of the Prosperity project cannot be justified as it is currently proposed.”

“as it is currently proposed” is the big phrase to pay attention to here…

In short… one of the central concerns of the proposed project was turning Fish Lake (aptly named) into a mining waste and tailings facility. Taseko Mines Ltd. the Vancouver-based mining company swore up and down that without the lake for a tailings facility the project was not economically feasible. They put a $300 million price tag on the lake — as in it would cost an extra $300 million to undertake the project without having access to destroying the lake.

And this made the project economically infeasible.

Despite fierce opposition from First Nations and many others — including the federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans for many, many years — Taseko insisted on pushing ahead with the ‘kill-Fish Lake’ option.

_ _ _ _ _

For those not entirely familiar with this project… Taseko Mines Ltd. has been trying to push this proposed open-pit copper and gold mine for many years. A few years ago, in my own conversations with senior staff at the organization, they suggested Taseko had over $90 million invested in bringing this project to development.

Now that it has gone through two environmental assessment process — British Columbia and Canada — those costs are sure to have risen significantly.

Taseko Mines lobbied British Columbia and Canada to ensure that they were not subjected to a Joint Review Panel. The purpose of a Joint Review process is to harmonize the process and save the costs of having to do two separate Environmental Assessments.

Now why would a company not want a harmonized process? Why enter two separate processes with the added cost?

That appears to be clear when through a fast-tracked British Columbia Environmental Assessment (EA) the proposed project was approved.

This despite several important studies still not being completed. And the fact that the BC EA process still suggested that the project would have significant environmental impacts…

‘But these would be outweighed by the apparent economic benefits.’

_ _ _ _ _

Curious, that, as it is called an: “environmental” assessment”…

However, the BC EA website does suggest that the Office and process considers:

… thorough, timely and integrated assessment of the potential environmental, economic, social, heritage and health effects that may occur during the lifecycle of these projects

_ _ _ _ _

Yet, if one reviews the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA) website there is a much more comprehensive discussion of the benefits of “sustainable development” and there are lengthy reports describing what this means and how Canada will uphold its international commitments on this front.

To provide Canadians with high-quality federal environmental assessments that contribute to informed decision making in support of sustainable development.

The classic internationally-recognized definition of sustainable development being upheld here: “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”

In the mid-1990s, every Canadian federal government ministry was bound by this definition and provided strategies, actions plans, and other bureaucratic drivel to meet this definition. (you know… benchmarks, accountability measures, best practices, etc.)

And so what option was the federal government left with last November when the “scathing” federal EA assessment report was tabled and not only laid out the ‘significant environmental impacts’ of killing Fish Lake and turning it into a tailings pond for mining waste but also more, as outlined in their final report:

The Panel concludes that the [Prosperity] Project would result in significant adverse environmental effects on fish and fish habitat, on navigation, on the current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes by First Nations and on cultural heritage, and on certain potential or established Aboriginal rights or title.

The Panel also concludes that the Project, in combination with past, present and reasonably foreseeable future projects would result in a significant adverse cumulative effect on grizzly bears in the South Chilcotin region and on fish and fish habitat.

Yeah, that does seem a bit scathing… and straight forward.

Sorry folks, Rejected. (with rubber stamp)

_ _ _ _ _ _

Now through the federal EA process many questions were asked about alternative proposals for the project. Against Taseko’s desires, they did start to rumble about other options, as opposed to killing Fish Lake — especially as commodity prices such as gold and copper started to recover from the global recession.

However, some of those options may very well have bigger impacts then the initial proposal.

And now, folks, we have “New Prosperity“.

Taseko Mines has created a fancy new PR website touting all the economic advantages of their “New” project. One can also read the “new” project summary, which includes:

…While the New Prosperity proposal does result in the loss of the 6 hectare Little Fish Lake, Little Fish Lake provides only low overwintering values (i.e., it is subject to winterkill)…

Hmmm.

I’m guessing there’s no connection between Little Fish Lake and Fish Lake…?

And, yup, i’m sure that Little fish “provides only low wintering values”…

I’m attaching a couple of images that most folks learn in elementary school:

And here’s another:

Fascinating stuff, that ecology thing…

_ _ _ _ _ _

Now, I’m sure there’s no connection between the incredible run on commodity prices such as Gold and Copper over this past year? Gold now sits at record prices, copper not far off.

And somehow Taseko’s “long-term” forecasts for these metals looks so much better now, then they did two years ago.

How does that happen?

How does the “forecast” change that dramatically?

Oh wait, because its based a helluva lot more on current prices then it has anything to do with what computer models pump out. Because really, we know that economic forecasting is less accurate than weather forecasting, and even less accurate then things like modelling natural ecosystems (e.g. wild salmon returns).

So let ask the experts this… what happens when a project such as this ramps into development and commodity prices crash?

Then no lake (even Little Fish Lake), and ‘no economic benefits’.

_ _ _ _ _ _

Now, it is important to notice that the federal government (aka Conservatives) left the door wide open for Taseko to return to the consultants… er… drawing table to draft up more reports and more plans to revise their development plans…

However, even the alternatives discussed through the previous EA process will most likely still have significant environmental impacts. The new proposal (e.g. “New Prosperity”) reminds me of the old saying of putting lipstick on a pig…

And this apparent “New Prosperity” is largely based on commodity bubble prices that won’t last in a very, very fragile world economy — and still doesn’t change the fact that the ‘new prosperity’ represented in the project still poses significant adverse environmental impacts and effects.

It may be a “new” prosperity — but that’s still to the same people as before, not the local First Nations and others that still oppose the project in its “new” form.

And it’s still the “old” environmental impacts, and still the “old” economy vs. environment debate.

And most of all… it still makes a mockery of an Environmental Assessment process in BC that is still simply a BC Liberal-government kangaroo court, rubber stamping facility.

http://www.salmonguy.org/?p=4343