Issue at a Glance
Prompt Action Needed on British Columbia Mines Affecting Transboundary Rivers
Aerial image of aftermath of the Mount Polley mine tailings disaster on August 4, 2014.
The Problem
British Columbia (B.C.) is aggressively pursuing large‐scale mining development bordering Southeast Alaska in three major transboundary watersheds: the Taku, Stikine and Unuk (~30,000 sq. mi. area). Alaskans are concerned about the impacts of large‐scale mining development in these river valleys, given the unprecedented scale, scope and speed of these projects, the recent Mount Polley mine tailings disaster in B.C.’s Fraser River valley, and the economic and cultural value of these watersheds. The State of Alaska has been involved in the environmental assessment of some mining projects in this area but this limited participation has been insufficient to protect Alaska interests across the whole region over the long term.
Alaska/the U.S. does not have an equal seat at the table with B.C./Canada for meaningful discussions about development in shared watersheds, despite the fact Alaska receives the costs of these mines, and no benefits.
The Solution
Under the Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909, the U.S. Department of State has the authority to refer the issue of potential implications of upstream development on downstream interests to the International Joint Commission (IJC) for review. Article IV of the Treaty states, “… waters flowing across the boundary shall not be polluted on either side to the injury of health or property on the other.” In essence, the IJC, through a team of experts from both countries, investigates the potential for development to violate Article IV and provides recommendations. Thousands of Alaskans call on the State of Alaska, on Congress and on the State Department for leadership on this issue and, specifically, for the referral of this situation to the IJC.
Who’s Spoken Out?
This is a rare issue that unites Alaskans. Examples of those expressing concerns are:
Local Governments – Southeast Conference of Mayors, Ketchikan Gateway Borough, City of Kupreanof, of Port Alexander and of Tenakee Springs, Petersburg Borough, Point Baker Community Association, Inc., City and Borough of Sitka, of Wrangell and of Juneau, and City of Pelican.
Lawmakers – Alaska State legislators (Senator Dennis Egan, Representative Cathy Muñoz, Representative Sam Kito III, and Representative Jonathan Kreiss‐Tomkins), and Alaska’s congressional delegation
Tribes – United Tribal Transboundary Mining Work Group, Alaska Native Brotherhood & Alaska Native Sisterhood, Alaska Federation of Natives, National Congress of American Indians, Central Council of Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes of Alaska, Ketchikan Indian Community, Organized Village of Kake, Wrangell Cooperative Association, Petersburg Indian Association, Klawock Cooperative Association, Douglas Indian Association, Hydaburg Cooperative Association, Craig Tribal Association, Organized Village of Kasaan
Fishing Groups & Seafood Processors – Alaska Trollers Association, Petersburg Vessel Owners Association, United Fishermen of Alaska, Alaska Glacier Seafoods, Taku River Reds, Seafood Producers Co‐op
Scientists – Over 600 scientists signed a letter of concern to Canadian Prime Minster Harper in 2012
Tourism Businesses – Un‐Cruise Adventures, AK Coastal Quest, Chinook Shores Lodge, AK Flyfishing Goods
Status of Proposed Mining Projects, by Watershed
Numerous projects are underway across the transboundary region. The large‐scale open‐pit and underground copper‐gold mines of most concern at this time include:
TAKU:
Virtually the entire northwest B.C. portion of the Alaska/B.C. transboundary region is staked for mineral development. There will undoubtedly be more mining proposals, along with the development of supporting infrastructure, now that B.C.’s Northwest Transmission Line electrifies this remote, rugged region.
British Columbia (B.C.) is aggressively pursuing large‐scale mining development bordering Southeast Alaska in three major transboundary watersheds: the Taku, Stikine and Unuk (~30,000 sq. mi. area). Alaskans are concerned about the impacts of large‐scale mining development in these river valleys, given the unprecedented scale, scope and speed of these projects, the recent Mount Polley mine tailings disaster in B.C.’s Fraser River valley, and the economic and cultural value of these watersheds. The State of Alaska has been involved in the environmental assessment of some mining projects in this area but this limited participation has been insufficient to protect Alaska interests across the whole region over the long term.
Alaska/the U.S. does not have an equal seat at the table with B.C./Canada for meaningful discussions about development in shared watersheds, despite the fact Alaska receives the costs of these mines, and no benefits.
The Solution
Under the Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909, the U.S. Department of State has the authority to refer the issue of potential implications of upstream development on downstream interests to the International Joint Commission (IJC) for review. Article IV of the Treaty states, “… waters flowing across the boundary shall not be polluted on either side to the injury of health or property on the other.” In essence, the IJC, through a team of experts from both countries, investigates the potential for development to violate Article IV and provides recommendations. Thousands of Alaskans call on the State of Alaska, on Congress and on the State Department for leadership on this issue and, specifically, for the referral of this situation to the IJC.
Who’s Spoken Out?
This is a rare issue that unites Alaskans. Examples of those expressing concerns are:
Local Governments – Southeast Conference of Mayors, Ketchikan Gateway Borough, City of Kupreanof, of Port Alexander and of Tenakee Springs, Petersburg Borough, Point Baker Community Association, Inc., City and Borough of Sitka, of Wrangell and of Juneau, and City of Pelican.
Lawmakers – Alaska State legislators (Senator Dennis Egan, Representative Cathy Muñoz, Representative Sam Kito III, and Representative Jonathan Kreiss‐Tomkins), and Alaska’s congressional delegation
Tribes – United Tribal Transboundary Mining Work Group, Alaska Native Brotherhood & Alaska Native Sisterhood, Alaska Federation of Natives, National Congress of American Indians, Central Council of Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes of Alaska, Ketchikan Indian Community, Organized Village of Kake, Wrangell Cooperative Association, Petersburg Indian Association, Klawock Cooperative Association, Douglas Indian Association, Hydaburg Cooperative Association, Craig Tribal Association, Organized Village of Kasaan
Fishing Groups & Seafood Processors – Alaska Trollers Association, Petersburg Vessel Owners Association, United Fishermen of Alaska, Alaska Glacier Seafoods, Taku River Reds, Seafood Producers Co‐op
Scientists – Over 600 scientists signed a letter of concern to Canadian Prime Minster Harper in 2012
Tourism Businesses – Un‐Cruise Adventures, AK Coastal Quest, Chinook Shores Lodge, AK Flyfishing Goods
Status of Proposed Mining Projects, by Watershed
Numerous projects are underway across the transboundary region. The large‐scale open‐pit and underground copper‐gold mines of most concern at this time include:
TAKU:
- Tulsequah Chief – has most needed permits, awaiting construction funding.
- New Polaris and Big Bull ‐ proposed, not yet in Environmental Assessment (EA) process.
- Galore Creek ‐ undergoing re‐scoping by the company, not yet in EA process.
- Red Chris – began operations on Feb. 3, 2015. Schaft Creek ‐ in early stage of EA process.
- KSM ‐ approved under B.C. and Canadian EA processes, now in permitting process and awaiting development funding.
- Brucejack – in EA process.
Virtually the entire northwest B.C. portion of the Alaska/B.C. transboundary region is staked for mineral development. There will undoubtedly be more mining proposals, along with the development of supporting infrastructure, now that B.C.’s Northwest Transmission Line electrifies this remote, rugged region.