Words: Paul Moinester Photos: Travis Rummel 2016-12-16 15:06:33
Wild salmon inspire revolutions. They pit world powers against each other. They turn political enemies into allies and vice versa. They beat back billion-dollar corporations. Sometimes they unite disparate communities and other times they drive deep, divisive wedges between them. They carry countless local economies squarely on their backs. So it should come as no surprise that a series of large open-pit mining proposals in northern British Columbia just upstream of the Alaskan border and one of the world’s last remaining salmon strongholds has incited a firestorm. Dubbed the transboundary mines, the series of 10 active, planned or inactive mines pose a grave risk to a wild salmon fishery and the thousands of people who rely on this robust resource across northern British Columbia and southeast Alaska—from First Nations, to commercial salmon fishermen, to sport fishermen, to the tourism industry and to salmon-centric communities. Nations define themselves by their borders, but water does not abide by them. That truth lies at the heart of the transboundary issue, as these 10 mine sites reside in three major watersheds—the Taku, Stikine and Unuk—that begin among the jagged peaks of British Columbia, cross the border into Southeast Alaska and terminate in the waters of the Inside Passage. While the jobs and wealth generated by these mines will remain in Canada, the environmental degradation created by them will flow downstream into the United States. Salmon create strange political bedfellows, but the cost-benefit inequity of these projects between Canada and the United States has created an especially bizarre political paradigm in the world of salmon politics. Perhaps no bedfellows are stranger than the unlikely union of Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chairwoman Senator Lisa Murkowski working with the U.S. State Department to encourage the Canadian and BC governments to bolster their environmental regulations. For years, Senator Murkowski has led the charge to gut the Environmental Protection Agency’s authority to stop the Pebble Mine, a proposed massive copper and gold mine in Alaska’s Bristol Bay. Yet now Senator Murkowski is actively working—along with the rest of the mining-friendly Alaskan Congressional delegation—to embolden the U.S. State Department to pressure the Canadian government to increase its environmental regulations and oversight of mining projects that closely resemble Pebble Mine. This plea is being echoed by Canadian First Nations, Alaskan indigenous groups, communities, businesses and environmental organizations on both sides of the border that are concerned about the risks of these mines and British Columbia’s lackluster and antiquated mining regulations. From afar, British Columbia looks like Eden. But dig a bit deeper and it more closely resembles Texas covered by rainforest—a land with an addiction to extracting natural resources and a burning antipathy for environmental regulations. The combination of these characteristics and a mammoth, untapped reserve of copper and gold have transformed this sparsely populated province into a hotbed of hard rock mining. Mining companies have flocked to the fertile earthen and political grounds of British Columbia—a staggering 75 percent of the world’s mining companies are based in Canada. These companies have been embraced by the BC government, which is working to expedite approval of mining projects, and in 2015 doubled the budget for the department tasked with permitting new mines. In 2015, BC’s Premier Christy Clark announced that 10 new mega-mines would be permitted in the next few years, unusual timing for such a bold announcement since it came in the wake of what is widely regarded as the worst mining disaster in Canadian history—Mount Polley. For years, mining companies had held up Imperial Metal’s Mount Polley mine, located in central British Columbia, as a shining example of open-pit copper and gold mining done right. When challenged on the safety of their proposed transboundary mines, companies would proudly proclaim they planned to use the same technologies and safeguards as Mount Polley. Then on Aug. 4, 2014 one of Mount Polley’s tailings impoundments failed and unleashed roughly 6.3 billion gallons of toxic mining waste into BC’s salmon-rich Fraser River. For Premier Clark and BC’s mining industry, this disaster was a speed bump—Imperial Metals reopened Mount Polley less than two years later. But for First Nations, environmental organizations, fishermen and concerned citizens, Mount Polley crystallized their gravest fears about the transboundary mines. Analyzing and debating mine safety requirements can be a nebulous endeavor, but when a tailings pond roughly the size of New York’s Central Park breaches, the issue becomes painfully visceral. For concerned individuals, the Mount Polley spill was a harbinger of transboundary horrors, a fear made all the more frightening by the fact that Mount Polley is a small operation compared to what has been proposed. The timing of the disaster—at the height of the salmon run—was a stark reminder of what is at stake with the transboundary mines. In a world of declining salmon stocks, southeast Alaska’s salmon populations continue to thrive, fueling a robust and growing commercial and recreational salmon industry. In 2013—the year before the disaster—479 million pounds of salmon were harvested, a haul valued at approximately $375 million. That figure does not even include the recreational salmon fishery, also valued in the hundreds of millions. In the aftermath of the disaster, Imperial Metals and the BC government had a chance to redeem themselves in the face of mounting criticism and concern. However, the opportunity was squandered when the government refused to initially call the tailings pond failure an environmental disaster. That lack of culpability was reinforced 16 months later when after a lengthy investigation, the BC government failed to charge Imperial Metals with any wrongdoing. After spilling billions of gallons of toxic waste, Imperial Metals did not have to pay one cent in fines or damages. As Jacinda Mack, chair of First Nations Women Advocating for Responsible Mining, said, “What’s the point of having laws if governments and industry are not held accountable when they are violated?” For concerned individuals, the Mount Polley spill was a harbinger of transboundary horrors, a fear made all the more frightening by the fact that Mount Polley is a small operation compared to what has been proposed. Making matters worse is the two-year assessment BC Auditor General Carol Bellringer conducted on the province’s regulatory oversight of its mining industry. In the assessment, Bellringer notes, “almost every one of our expectations for a robust compliance and enforcement program within the Ministry of Energy and Mines and the Ministry of the Environment were not met.” Additionally, Bellringer found, “major gaps in resources, planning and tools” and concluded the existing regulatory environment was inadequate “to protect the province from significant environmental risks.” In the wake of the assessment, Bill Bennett, the Energy and Mines Minister, agreed with the recommendations and has worked to implement them. He claimed, “We’re not shying away from the fact our legislation was old. It needed improvement.” And in the last several months, Bennett has made significant changes to mining codes such as updating standards for the design and management of tailings storage facilities, creating independent tailing review boards and revising the permit applications process. British Columbia officials have made it clear they will continue to implement more recommendations from the assessment and other safety reports that protect the public and environment from future mining disasters. Despite the work being done, Minister Bennett is clear that with mines, “You have to acknowledge there’s always going to be some level of risk.” That risk is something Minister Bennett and BC’s government have chosen to live with, but Alaskans, many First Nations and concerned Canadians refuse to accept the potential danger. Within British Columbia, First Nations and conservation organizations such as Salmon Beyond Borders and Rivers Without Borders are pushing hard to try and defeat mining projects as well as sharpen the teeth and strength of BC’s regulatory regime. On the American side of the border, Senator Murkowski and the cohort of the concerned recognize they cannot directly defeat mine projects in another sovereign nation. Therefore this fight has fallen into the lap of the U.S. State Department, which is equipped with the 1909 U.S.-Canada Boundary Waters Treaty that encourages both countries to strive to prevent damages to resources in the other country. It is certainly a more convoluted message and approach than “Tell EPA No Pebble Mine,” but it is an equally important one. If the Pebble fight has proven anything, it is that even in a world driven by money and addicted to resource extraction, the power of salmon can prevail—salmon can unite disparate parties and force governments to value long-term, sustainable economics over short-term economic windfalls. Salmon can inspire tens of thousands of people who have never been to Alaska or experienced the thrill of a catching on of the fish to speak out against a proposal that threatens one of the most critical populations left on the planet. The power of salmon is being put to the test. Stakes are high, tools are scant and the opposition is powerful, determined and deep-pocketed. But fortunately salmon have marshaled a posse of prominent politicians and enlisted an army of public support. And although the call to action might be murky and the path to victory ill-defined, the potential for progress is real and obtainable. Here’s to hoping the power of salmon prevails again. After spilling billions of gallons of toxic waste, Imperial Metals did not have to pay one cent in fines or damages.
©Funny Feelings LLC. View All Articles.
Crossed Borders
https://digital.theflyfishjournal.com/articles/crossed-borders