Published by University of Washington School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences 

A number of UW researchers have joined an international group of science and policy experts to publish a joint commentary in the journal Science, calling on U.S. and Canadian leaders to address damages and risks caused by Canadian mine pollution flowing downstream into U.S. states. Led by researchers at the University of Montana, the cohort included five graduates and one PhD candidate from the UW School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences (SAFS).

The letter examines Canada’s environmental assessment and regulation of large-scale industrial mines in transboundary watersheds. “Environmental baseline datasets, with which mine permitting decisions are made, are frequently insufficient and underpredict environmental impacts mines ultimately impose,” said co-author Sarah O’Neal, a UW SAFS PhD candidate in the Schindler lab. O’Neal’s current research highlights the importance of establishing transparent and peer-reviewed environmental baseline data for critical salmon habitat at the Pebble Mine site in southwest Alaska. She explains the permitting and operation of mines within transboundary watersheds are further complicated by jurisdictional and political factors.

“Pollution from mining activity, if not properly predicted, monitored, and mitigated, can cause severe environmental degradation downstream,” she said. “Mining activities are a major source of pollution throughout the western U.S., including in Washington state, where salmon runs are already experiencing historic lows.”

The complete letter can be found on the Science journal’s website.
This article was adapted from a University of Montana press release.
​

Western News, May 1, 2020 8:33 AM

One study published last year found elevated levels of selenium in the eggs of mountain whitefish collected from three sites on the Kootenai River downstream of the Libby Dam.
Research by the U.S. Geological Survey found that six of the eight samples taken in September 2018 from mountain whitefish eggs exceeded EPA’s water quality recommendations for selenium.
In February, a letter from EPA Region 8 to two officials in British Columbia cited heightened concerns about water quality in Lake Koocanusa and the Kootenai watershed.
The EPA letter noted that research has indicated that the Kootenai River downstream of Libby Dam is being affected by pollutants from Elk Valley coal mines in British Columbia.
And it sought information about a new water treatment approach touted by the primary polluter, Teck Resources.
The Montana Department of Environmental Quality, EPA and other agencies have long been concerned about rising selenium levels in Lake Koocanusa tied to pollution from open pit coal mines operated by Teck upstream in British Columbia.
State Sen. Mike Cuffe, R-Eureka, acknowledged unease about selenium pollution in Lake Koocanusa and evidence of pollution downstream of the Libby Dam.
“It is a very serious concern,” Cuffe said Tuesday. “But it’s not an immediate thing to panic over.”
He said the selenium levels might have aquatic impacts but do not pose a danger to humans. He said people who read about the coal mines and the selenium pollution downstream occasionally overreact.
But Dave Hadden of Headwaters Montana referenced a letter in the April issue of the journal Science that was signed by a host of scientists and policy experts. The letter warned of increasing risks to Montana, Washington, Idaho and Alaska from transboundary mining operations.
“The stakes are high,” the authors wrote. “Upstream Canadian mines threaten downstream economies, waters, and ways of life.”
Hadden said the stakes are especially high for northwest Montana.
“If ever there were a neighborhood of communities that did not need more mining waste flowing in from upstream, it’s Libby and Troy and Lincoln County,” Hadden said.
“They can’t afford to be Canada’s settling pond. Our taxpayers shouldn’t be subsidizing Canada’s economy by paying to clean up their mess.”
Southern British Columbia has large reserves of high-grade metallurgical coal, which is mined and shipped globally by Teck Resources to steel manufacturers. The coal resides deep within mountainous terrain along the Elk River Valley and large quantities of overburden remain as part of the mining.
“Selenium leaches out of this waste rock and into the Elk River, a tributary of the Kootenai River which forms Lake Koocanusa,” according to DEQ.
Selenium is a naturally occurring element present in sedimentary rocks, shales, coal and phosphate deposits and soils. It can be a nutritionally essential element for animals in small amounts but toxic at higher concentrations.
DEQ has reported that selenium becomes concentrated in the food chain, particularly in lakes, and “is known to compromise reproduction in certain species of fish.”
Cuffe said that he and Lincoln County commissioners Jerry Bennett and Josh Letcher visited Teck Coal and toured a water treatment facility.
“There is a tremendous amount of money being spent and a tremendous amount of technology involved,” Cuffe said.
He said he got the impression Teck is committed to reducing selenium pollution from the mines.
Teck says it has developed a Saturated Rock Fill water treatment facility that “is achieving near complete removal of selenium and nitrate.” The process injects water for treatment into former mining areas backfilled with rock. Then, Teck says, “natural bacteria convert dissolved forms of selenium into a solid form which remains securely stored in the SRF and nitrate to inert nitrogen gas which is safely released.”
The Feb. 4 letter from the EPA sought information about the Saturated Rock Fill process and its efficacy. The letter was addressed to George Heyman, minister of environment and climate change strategy, and Bruce Ralston, minister of energy, mines and petroleum reserves.
“We believe it is critical that U.S. federal agencies could have the opportunity to evaluate the effectiveness of this new proposed mitigation approach by reviewing the available evaluation and documentation of the results of SRF deployment conducted to date by Teck Resources and their consultants,” the EPA wrote.
The agency said an independent review of the performance of Saturated Rock Fill approach “could help facilitate U.S. stakeholder confidence in the effectiveness of this new approach and build upon the collaboration established between our agencies.”
On Wednesday, Chris Stannell, a spokesman for Teck Resources, said the company has responded to the EPA’s request.
“We have provided EPA with comprehensive information on the Saturated Rock Fill water treatment technology in response to their request, including data on the performance of the technology and how it can help to achieve water quality objectives more quickly and efficiently than other forms of treatment,” Stannell said in an email.
Stannell said use of the Saturated Rock Fill technology has been endorsed by the British Columbia government. He said Teck has received approval to double the current Saturated Rock Fill water treatment capacity at its Elkview Operations.
“Our SRF at Elkview has been successfully operating since January 2018, treating up to 10 million litres per day and achieving near-complete removal of nitrate and selenium from mine-impacted waters,” Stannell added.
A spokeswoman for EPA Region 8 did not respond by press time as to whether the agency has received and reviewed Teck’s material
Stannell said Teck is also developing a new method to reduce release of nitrate by using liners that prevent explosives with nitrates from coming into contact with water.
In 2015, DEQ and British Columbia’s Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change Strategy established the Lake Koocanusa Monitoring and Research Working Group. The group’s mission is to study and address current and future water quality concerns in the Lake Koocanusa watershed and “to work towards joint solutions for managing potential selenium contamination including development of site specific criteria for the protection of uses of the lake.”
Participants in the working group include DEQ, EPA, the Army Corps of Engineers, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks and Native American Tribes from the U.S. and Canada.

Authored by Flathead Lake Bio Station researcher Erin Sexton, new paper in ‘Science’ highlights impacts of Canadian mines
​BY TRISTAN SCOTT // APR 28, 2020

Led by a local University of Montana researcher, an international group of science and policy experts published a joint commentary in the acclaimed journal “Science” urging U.S. and Canadian leadership to address damages and risks caused by Canadian mine pollution flowing downstream into U.S. border states like Montana.

The joint publication highlights the threat and impacts of Canadian mines on shared rivers, fisheries and communities, and calls on the two governments to “align large-scale mine assessments with defensible science.”

“Our paper highlights key shortcomings with mine evaluation and permitting processes in transboundary rivers,” Erin Sexton, a researcher at UM’s Flathead Lake Biological Station and the paper’s lead author, said. “We concluded that Canada, the United States and Indigenous governments must collaboratively engage on joint environmental assessment of proposed, existing and legacy mines in our shared rivers.”

According to the researchers, some of the most culturally and ecologically significant rivers flowing from Canada into the United States are impaired or threatened by a modern-day mining boom, where mines in British Columbia threaten downstream regions in Montana, Idaho, Washington and Alaska.

The letter raises significant concerns about deficiencies in Canada’s environmental assessment and regulation of large-scale industrial mines in transboundary watersheds. Those concerns include the underestimated risk of mine failures and contamination, the reliance on untested mitigation technologies and the lack of independent science in mining assessment and permitting procedures.

“We hope this commentary elevates the discussion of mining in transboundary rivers and improves the science of evaluating their impacts,” said Chris Sergeant, a co-author and fellow FLBS researcher.

Recent discussions have centered on troubling new information detailed in a letter authored by regional administrators for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, who expressed heightened concerns that environmental regulators in British Columbia continue to authorize mining projects and expansions despite mounting evidence that environmental standards are being exceeded.
In that letter, the regional administrators pressed Canadian environmental officials to address water quality studies indicating that the Kootenai River downstream of Libby Dam is being affected by pollutants from coal mines in British Columbia’s Elk River Valley, and to disclose additional information on its plans to treat the contamination while permitting mining expansions.

Last year, a bipartisan coalition of senators from all four states bordering the coal-rich province of British Columbia — including U.S. Sen. Jon Tester, D-Montana, and U.S. Sen. Steve Daines, R-Montana — pressed top Canadian officials to adopt more stringent water-quality standards.
In their newly published paper, the UM researchers conclude that the persistent problem of mine contamination flowing across the international boundary violates the Canada-U.S. Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909, which states that “waters flowing across the boundary shall not be polluted on either side to the injury of health and property of the other.”

The transboundary Kootenai River in northwest Montana is emblematic of this problem, the researchers wrote, because contamination is steadily increasing as active mines in British Columbia continue to deliver mine pollution into Lake Koocanusa and the Kootenai River in Montana and Idaho. Contaminants in U.S. fish now exceed thresholds for protection due to upstream Canadian mining.

“Water flows downhill, and so can pollution. Honoring the Boundary Waters Treaty would serve to improve the health of our shared rivers,” co-author Jonathan Moore of Simon Fraser University in British Columbia said.

Concerns have spiked in both countries in recent years and attention has intensified on the Elk Valley drainage in southeastern British Columbia and on Teck, the Vancouver-based global mining giant that operates four world-class steelmaking coal mines across the border from Montana.
The heavy scrutiny is centered on increasing amounts of contamination from coal waste byproducts leaching into the Elk River and its many tributaries, which drain into two bodies of water shared by B.C. and Montana: Koocanusa and the Kootenai River.

Samples of fish species and water quality taken from Lake Koocanusa and other monitoring sites in the Elk basin have revealed heightened levels of selenium, cadmium, nitrate and sulphate from decades of coal mining activity.

Selenium is a naturally occurring element that can become highly toxic when present in elevated concentrations. It’s known to cause deformities in fish eggs, incidents of which have been documented in the Elk and Kootenai watersheds.

Recent studies, including a report by Sexton and other researchers at the Flathead Lake Biological Station, along with data samples taken locally, have prompted worries about long-term impacts to the entire watershed and its resident wildlife.

“There is a lot at risk with these big mines in our transboundary rivers,” Sexton said. “Our countries need to act now on joint science-based review of the mines for the long-term stewardship of our shared waters and communities.”

Other FLBS-affiliated authors on the commentary are Chris Frissell, Ric Hauer, Rachel Malison and Diane Whited. The complete letter can be found on the Science journal’s website at https://science.sciencemag.org/content/368/6489/376.2.

By VI, April 28, 2020, Vacation Inspire 

The Red Chris Mine in the transboundary Stikine-Iskut River watershed.
​Juneau, Alaska (KINY) – An international group of 22 science and policy experts have published a joint commentary in the prestigious journal Science regarding Canadian mines.


At a workshop led by the University of Montana and Alaskan researchers, the group, which included representatives from U.S. Tribes and British Columbia First Nations, concluded that the threats and impacts of Canadian mines on shared rivers, fisheries, and communities are not adequately assessed by the B.C. government.


The letter also calls on the U.S. and Canadian federal governments to invoke the U.S.-Canada Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909 and address the fact that B.C. mine assessments are neither adequately based on defensible science nor adequately protect U.S.-B.C. transboundary waters from mining pollution.


“This letter highlights the inadequacies of British Columbia’s evaluation and permitting process for massive toxic waste dumps in major salmon-producing transboundary rivers, like the Taku, Stikine-Iskut, and Unuk-Nass river systems,” said Jill Weitz, director of Salmon Beyond Borders and one of the policy experts who co-authored the publication. “B.C.’s mine assessment process leaves Alaskans unprotected because it underestimates the risk of mine failures and contamination, and doesn’t rely on independent science.”


The Taku, Stikine-Iskut, and Unuk-Nass are transboundary watersheds and home to world-class salmon rivers that originate in northwest B.C. and flow into Southeast Alaska. These iconic rivers and their watersheds have been centers of culture, commerce, and biodiversity for thousands of years and are the lifeblood of the numerous communities and nineteen federally recognized tribes of the region. Over two-dozen, large-scale Canadian mines are in some phase of development or operation at the headwaters of these rivers.


Raymond Paddock, environmental coordinator for the Central Council of the Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes of Alaska said, “This letter validates the concerns of our Tribes in Southeast Alaska as well as our ongoing request for increased federal engagement from Canada, the United States, and Indigenous governments. We must work together to better understand and manage the proposed, existing, and abandoned mines in our shared rivers.”


Tlingit & Haida has called on the U.S. federal government for action under the Boundary Waters Treaty and to meaningfully engage the tribes of Southeast Alaska. In 2015, Tlingit & Haida began working to collect baseline water quality data, sediment sampling, and water quality surveys on the Taku and Stikine Rivers. In 2018, Tlingit & Haida expanded their scope to sampling on the Alsek River near Yakutat, and in 2019, they added the Chilkat and Klehini Rivers outside of Klukwan and Haines.


Tlingit & Haida has invited the tribes of the communities where sampling is occurring to create opportunities for these communities to develop their own capacity to conduct water quality sampling as well. This collaboration has allowed for capacity development, offset costs, share resources, and develop and enhance partnerships within Southeast Alaska. Tlingit & Haida would like to see this type of relationship development with First Nations in British Columbia as well.


The authors of the Science letter conclude that the persistent problem of mine contamination flowing across the international boundary violates the Canada-U.S. Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909, which states that “waters flowing across the boundary shall not be polluted on either side to the injury of health or property on the other.”


“Thousands of Americans, including Tribes and members of Congress, as well as current and former U.S. governors, have urged the U.S. Department of State and Global Affairs Canada to enforce the Boundary Waters Treaty and to involve the International Joint Commission so that we can all work together to protect clean water and our way of life. We cannot ignore the science any longer!” said Tis Peterman, executive director of Southeast Alaska Indigenous Transboundary Commission.


As eight U.S. Senators stated in a June 2019 bipartisan letter to B.C. Premier John Horgan, “Indigenous peoples whose lands are affected by past, present and proposed mines near transboundary rivers have voiced concern and requested that the U.S. and Canadian governments undertake cumulative assessments of impacts to communities, cultural and natural resources, as well as the enforcement of the Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909.”

Alice Bailey, 907-474-5350, April 27, 2020
University of Alaska Fairbanks, College of Fisheries and Ocean Sciences 

Twenty-two scientists and policymakers from the United States and Canada are urging U.S., Canadian and indigenous governments to address Canadian mining practices that threaten downstream ecosystems and fisheries in Alaska, Idaho, Montana and Washington. 

In a letter published in the journal Science on Friday, April 24, the group highlights the shortcomings of current environmental assessment and permitting practices required of large-scale industrial mines and describes the consequences of contaminating transboundary rivers.

Map courtesy of Chris Sergeant/Flathead Lake Biological Station
This map locates some of the larger proposed, existing and historical mines in the Taku, Stikine and Unuk river drainages. All three rivers flow from British Columbia into Southeast Alaska.

In Alaska, many people depend on salmon that spawn in the Taku, Stikine and Unuk rivers for personal, cultural and economic health, explained Megan McPhee, a co-author with the University of Alaska Fairbanks College of Fisheries and Ocean Sciences. All of these rivers originate in British Columbia and have multiple mines operating or proposed in their watersheds.

“Current methods for assessing and mitigating the risks to salmon posed by Canadian mining plans in transboundary rivers fall short,” she said. “The future of chinook, sockeye and coho salmon running the Taku, Stikine and Unuk rivers depends on science that is independent, rigorous and transparent.”

Chris Sergeant, a graduate student at CFOS and a co-author of the letter, calculated that mining claims cover 59% of the drainage area in the Unuk watershed. The Red Chris Mine operates in the headwaters of the Stikine River watershed, and several more industrial-scale projects are proposed. “In the Taku River watershed,” Sergeant said, “the Tulsequah Chief Mine has been leaking acid mine drainage since the 1950s.” 

The letter in Science urges Canadian and U.S. governments to honor the Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909, which states that “waters flowing across the boundary shall not be polluted on either side to the injury of health and property of the other.” 

Photo by Chris Sergeant
The Tulsequah River winds through the mountains in British Columbia near the leaking Tulsequah Chief Mine. The Tulsequah River is a tributary of the Taku River, which flows into the marine waters of Southeast Alaska just south of Juneau.

The authors believe there is an opportunity to address these issues by implementing an internationally agreed-upon process for rigorous science-based review and regulation. Jonathan Moore, a co-author from Simon Fraser University in British Columbia, said, “Honoring the Boundary Waters Treaty would serve to improve the health of our shared rivers.” 

When evaluating the impacts to shared waters and downstream communities, “stakeholders and decision-makers must be equals at the table,” said Erin Sexton, a researcher at the University of Montana’s Flathead Lake Biological Station and the paper’s lead author. 
​
Sergeant said he hopes their commentary “elevates the discussion of mining in transboundary rivers and improves the science of evaluating their impacts.”  
The complete text of the letter can be seen on the Science website at https://science.sciencemag.org/content/368/6489/376.2.
CONTACTS: 
Megan McPhee, 907-796-5464, mvmcphee@alaska.edu; 
Chris Sergeant, 907-500-4540, csergeant@alaska.edu

KINY News of the NorthMonday, April 27th, 2020 4:08pm

Juneau, Alaska (KINY) - An international group of 22 science and policy experts have published a joint commentary in the prestigious journal Science regarding Canadian mines.
The group is urging United States and Canadian leadership to immediately address damages and risks caused by Canadian mine pollution flowing downstream into U.S. states.
At a workshop led by the University of Montana and Alaskan researchers, the group, which included representatives from U.S. Tribes and British Columbia First Nations, concluded that the threats and impacts of Canadian mines on shared rivers, fisheries, and communities are not adequately assessed by the B.C. government.

The letter also calls on the U.S. and Canadian federal governments to invoke the U.S.-Canada Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909 and address the fact that B.C. mine assessments are neither adequately based on defensible science nor adequately protect U.S.-B.C. transboundary waters from mining pollution.

“This letter highlights the inadequacies of British Columbia’s evaluation and permitting process for massive toxic waste dumps in major salmon-producing transboundary rivers, like the Taku, Stikine-Iskut, and Unuk-Nass river systems,” said Jill Weitz, director of Salmon Beyond Borders and one of the policy experts who co-authored the publication. “B.C.'s mine assessment process leaves Alaskans unprotected because it underestimates the risk of mine failures and contamination, and doesn’t rely on independent science.”

The Taku, Stikine-Iskut, and Unuk-Nass are transboundary watersheds and home to world-class salmon rivers that originate in northwest B.C. and flow into Southeast Alaska. These iconic rivers and their watersheds have been centers of culture, commerce, and biodiversity for thousands of years and are the lifeblood of the numerous communities and nineteen federally recognized tribes of the region. Over two-dozen, large-scale Canadian mines are in some phase of development or operation at the headwaters of these rivers.

Raymond Paddock, environmental coordinator for the Central Council of the Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes of Alaska said, “This letter validates the concerns of our Tribes in Southeast Alaska as well as our ongoing request for increased federal engagement from Canada, the United States, and Indigenous governments. We must work together to better understand and manage the proposed, existing, and abandoned mines in our shared rivers.”

Tlingit & Haida has called on the U.S. federal government for action under the Boundary Waters Treaty and to meaningfully engage the tribes of Southeast Alaska. In 2015, Tlingit & Haida began working to collect baseline water quality data, sediment sampling, and water quality surveys on the Taku and Stikine Rivers. In 2018, Tlingit & Haida expanded their scope to sampling on the Alsek River near Yakutat, and in 2019, they added the Chilkat and Klehini Rivers outside of Klukwan and Haines.

Tlingit & Haida has invited the tribes of the communities where sampling is occurring to create opportunities for these communities to develop their own capacity to conduct water quality sampling as well. This collaboration has allowed for capacity development, offset costs, share resources, and develop and enhance partnerships within Southeast Alaska. Tlingit & Haida would like to see this type of relationship development with First Nations in British Columbia as well.
The authors of the Science letter conclude that the persistent problem of mine contamination flowing across the international boundary violates the Canada-U.S. Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909, which states that “waters flowing across the boundary shall not be polluted on either side to the injury of health or property on the other.”

“Thousands of Americans, including Tribes and members of Congress, as well as current and former U.S. governors, have urged the U.S. Department of State and Global Affairs Canada to enforce the Boundary Waters Treaty and to involve the International Joint Commission so that we can all work together to protect clean water and our way of life. We cannot ignore the science any longer!” said Tis Peterman, executive director of Southeast Alaska Indigenous Transboundary Commission.

As eight U.S. Senators stated in a June 2019 bipartisan letter to B.C. Premier John Horgan, “Indigenous peoples whose lands are affected by past, present and proposed mines near transboundary rivers have voiced concern and requested that the U.S. and Canadian governments undertake cumulative assessments of impacts to communities, cultural and natural resources, as well as the enforcement of the Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909.”

The excerpt below is from the recent commentary pubished in Science, "Canada's mines pose transboundary risks", written by an intetrnational group of 22 science and policy experts. 

"In 2019, Canada approved an extension of the deadline to start one of the world's largest copper and gold mines in the headwaters of the transboundary Unuk River (1). The plan for Kerr-Sulphurets-Mitchell (KSM) mine is to dig one of the largest human-made holes on earth, erect one of the highest dams in North America, and operate water treatment for 200 years after the mine closes (2). Mines such as KSM pose long-term risks to downstream water quality, fish, and people (3). Given that mine contamination is not constrained by political boundaries, U.S., Canadian, and Indigenous governments must urgently engage in collaborative evaluation and regulation of mines in internationally shared rivers. Shortfall is mine assessments and permitting policies should be addressed." 
Click here to read the full letter, published in Science. 
​
Continue reading for a joint press release about the letter. 





​INTERNATIONAL LETTER URGES CANADA, U.S. TO JOINTLY ADDRESS BRITISH COLUMBIA TRANSBOUNDARY MINING POLLUTION 
​
An international group of 22 science and policy experts have published a joint commentary in the prestigious​ journal Science,​ urging United States (U.S.) and Canadian leadership to immediately address damages and risks caused by Canadian mine pollution flowing downstream into U.S. states. At a workshop led by University of Montana and Alaska researchers, the group, which included representatives from U.S. Tribes and British Columbia (B.C.) First Nations, concluded that the threats and impacts of Canadian mines on shared rivers, fisheries, and communities are not adequately assessed by the B.C. government. The letter also calls on the U.S. and Canadian federal governments to invoke the U.S.-Canada Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909 and address the fact that B.C. mine assessments are not adequately based on defensible science nor adequately protect U.S.-B.C. transboundary waters from mining pollution. 

“This letter highlights the inadequacies of British Columbia’s evaluation and permitting process for massive toxic waste dumps in major salmon-producing transboundary rivers, like the Taku, Stikine-Iskut, and Unuk-Nass river systems,” said Jill Weitz, director of Salmon Beyond Borders and one of the policy experts who co-authored the publication. “B.C.'s mine assessment process leaves Alaskans unprotected because it underestimates the risk of mine failures and contamination, and doesn’t rely on independent science.” 
​

The Taku, Stikine-Iskut, and Unuk-Nass are transboundary watersheds and home to world-class salmon rivers that originate in northwest B.C. and flow into Southeast Alaska. These iconic rivers and their watersheds have been centers of culture, commerce, and biodiversity for thousands of years and are the lifeblood of the numerous communities and nineteen federally recognized tribes of the region. Over two-dozen, large-scale Canadian mines are in some phase of development or operation at the headwaters of these rivers.

Raymond Paddock, environmental coordinator for the Central Council of the Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes of Alaska (Tlingit & Haida) said, “This letter validates the concerns of our Tribes in Southeast Alaska as well as our ongoing request for increased federal engagement from Canada, the United States, and Indigenous governments. We must work together to better understand and manage the proposed, existing and abandoned mines in our shared rivers.”

Tlingit & Haida has called on the U.S. federal government for action under the Boundary Waters Treaty and to meaningfully engage the tribes of Southeast Alaska. In 2015, Tlingit & Haida began working to collect baseline water quality data, sediment sampling and water quality surveys on the Taku and Stikine Rivers. In 2018, Tlingit & Haida expanded their scope to sampling on the Alsek River near Yakutat, and in 2019, they added the Chilkat and Klehini Rivers outside of Klukwan and Haines.

Tlingit & Haida has invited the tribes of the communities where sampling is occuring to create opportunities for these communities to develop their own capacity to conduct water quality sampling as well. This collaboration has allowed for capacity development, offset costs, share resources and develop and enhance partnerships within Southeast Alaska. Tlingit & Haida would like to see this type of relationship development with First Nations in British Columbia as well.

The authors of the ​Science​ letter conclude that the persistent problem of mine contamination flowing across the international boundary violates the Canada-U.S. Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909, which states that “waters flowing across the boundary shall not be polluted on either side to the injury of health or property on the other.”

“Thousands of Americans, including Tribes and members of Congress, as well as current and former U.S. governors, have urged the U.S. Department of State and Global Affairs Canada to enforce the Boundary Waters Treaty and to involve the International Joint Commission so that we can all work together to protect clean water and our way of life. We cannot ignore the science any longer!” said Tis Peterman, executive director of Southeast Alaska Indigenous Transboundary Commission (SEITC).

As eight U.S. Senators stated in a June 2019 ​bipartisan letter ​to B.C. Premier John Horgan, “Indigenous peoples whose lands are affected by past, present and proposed mines near transboundary rivers have voiced concern and requested that the U.S. and Canadian governments undertake cumulative assessments of impacts to communities, cultural and natural resources, as well as the enforcement of the Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909.” 
Download the full press release here.

###

Central Council of the Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes of Alaska​ is a tribal government representing over 31,000 Tlingit and Haida Indians worldwide. They are a sovereign entity and have a government-to-government relationship with the United States.

Southeast Alaska Indigenous Transboundary Commission​ is a consortium of 15 sovereign Tribal nations located in Southeast Alaska. Established in March 2014, SEITC seeks to protect the vital rivers that sustain our communities and culture. SEITC derives its authority from Tribal governments. Each member Tribe has formerly designated their representative by letter or resolution.

Salmon Beyond Borders​ is a campaign driven by sport and commercial fishermen, community leaders, tourism and recreation business owners and concerned citizens, in collaboration with Tribes and First Nations. We are united across the Alaska/British Columbia border to defend and sustain our transboundary rivers, jobs and way of life.

The University of Montana has an online open-access archive of images, maps and key letters and reports related to the transboundary mining issue. To access them, please ​click on this link​. You are welcome to use any of these in your own materials. 

Brad Terhune - Costmine, Mining.com | April 10, 2020 | 

The mining industry is fraught with capital cost overruns.   A quick internet search will turn up many examples. The results quickly high-light that as many as two-thirds of mining projects see cost overruns. Moreover, the researcher can see that it is a decades-long problem.  That is, the industry doesn’t seem to be getting better at their cost estimating. We aren’t learning from our mistakes.

Where does the problem lie? Our industry’s cost overrun problem is multi-faceted. There isn’t a single reason or error that we can definitively say is the key to the solution. Poor engineering assumptions, a lack of understanding of key risks (either actively choosing to “kick the can” or a simple failure to recognize risks), bias (both intentional and unintentional), aggressive timelines, and other reasons may play a role. These issues can contribute to cost overruns individually, although they more commonly occur in tandem.

OUR INDUSTRY’S COST OVERRUN PROBLEM IS MULTI-FACETED. THERE ISN’T A SINGLE REASON OR ERROR THAT WE CAN DEFINITIVELY SAY IS THE KEY TO THE SOLUTION

To highlight a single, yet profound example, consider Teck and Newmont’s Galore Creek project in northwest British Columbia. All of the information presented below is publicly available via company or securities websites. It is representative of the company and project information that would be available to investors.

Project exampleThe Galore Creek project is an alkalic porphyry copper-gold-silver system with at least three mineralizing events that deposited bornite, chalcopyrite, gold, silver, and other base metals, primarily in association with potassic alteration. Exploration and development are difficult due to its remote location and helicopter-only access. The project was originally discovered by Hudbay Mining in 1955 and has since been explored and partially developed by several companies.

NovaGold was the 100% owner immediately prior to June 2007, however it has since divested itself in full, via an initial partnership with Teck Resources in 2007, followed by a more recent agreement with Newmont. The project is currently being worked by a partnership of Teck and Newmont under the name Galore Creek Mining Corp. The first assessment of the development potential for the project was completed by Kennecott in 1992, but this example focuses on information from the last three publicly available studies of the project: a 2004 preliminary economic assessment, 2006 feasibility study and a 2011 pre-feasibility study.

The 2006 study resulted in the first declaration of reserves on the property. Permits were obtained and initial development (preconstruction) activities began based on this study. Then a third-party review of costs and work completed in 2007 (after a new partnership with Teck) showed that the economies of the project were ultimately not favourable.

Development activities were halted at that time, with the stated reasoning for the stoppage focused primarily on the complex sequencing related to the construction of the tailings dam and water management features. As we will see shortly, there was a much larger concern that likely played into halting development.

THE INCREASES IN TUNNEL AND INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS BETWEEN 2006 AND 2011 ARE SUBSTANTIAL AND NOT EASILY EXPLAINED

In 2008, the mineral reserves were reclassified back to mineral resources and an optimization study was implemented. Then, in 2010-2011, Galore Creek Mining Corp. commissioned several consultants to help it with a new prefeasibility study, which is the last publicly available report on the project. The following tables highlight the cost inflation at Galore Creek over the seven-year span covered by the latest publicly available reports. Table 1 shows the key project characteristics over time and Table 2 outlines the costs associated with each scenario.

If the costs shown in Table 2 are charted (Figure 1) and we consider the underlying project parameters in Table 1, we can begin to understand the capital cost progression at Galore Creek. The increases in mine development and plant posts are expected due to the higher production levels assumed for each subsequent study. (The actual increase in mine costs is uncertain due to reporting inconsistencies.) However, the increases in tunnel and infrastructure costs between 2006 and 2011 are substantial and not as easily explained.

These costs were dramatically understated in the earlier reports due to risks and scheduling not being well understood, as they pertain to the tunnel and other infrastructure aspects. With specific regard to the tunnel, the construction period was re-evaluated and time for completion moved from two years to four years. That is a huge oversight. Timelines for the water management features changed as well due to elaborate build sequencing.

Source: Canadian Mining JournalThese types of oversights, or lack of investigation into the risks of a project earlier in its development, can have significant impacts on the total estimated capital costs associated with project development.

In the Galore Creek example, the total estimated capital cost increased a whopping 131% between 2006 and 2011. (Figure 2).

What needs to happen?
The Galore Creek example highlights that companies should be making efforts to better understand their project risks (technical, market, government, etc.) and the potential effects they may have on costs.

Similarly, investors and financing houses should require and/or carry out more intensive due diligence work and conduct more thorough cost estimates earlier in a project’s life.

The end game for this additional work is a better project, from both technical and cost perspectives. What would happen if the industry suddenly shifted to better projects? Industry credibility would improve, projects would advance, and the currently narrowed financing options would potentially be reinvigorated.

Unfortunately, closing the gap between estimated costs at the study level and the actual costs of development is not an easy task. Individuals and companies would need to commit to understanding their project risks with real-time and real dollars, while also braving the prospect of having to condemn their own projects.

For the Galore Creek example, the publicly available information paints a bleak picture of its economic feasibility. However, it is clear that NovaGold was able to drum up interest in the project from two very significant multinational mining companies.

Perhaps there is more privately available information that would help us understand their interest in such a property, but this leads to my final point. What is your typical investor to do if all of the information isn’t at their disposal or if the public reports are of poor quality? If we want to see funds come back to the industry from the marijuana industry, and others, the onus is on us to improve reporting and to regain the confidence of the investor.
(This article first appeared in the Canadian Mining Journal)

Cecilia Jamasmie, Mining.com| April 7, 2020 |
​
More than a year after the tailings disaster at Vale’s (NYSE: VALE) Brazil Córrego do Feijão iron ore mine that killed 270 people, the mining industry is still slow on adopting changes needed to prevent similar catastrophes, a new study shows.

According to Switzerland-based Responsible Mining Foundation (RMF), while investor-led action has resulted in improved transparency regarding the state of global tailings storage facilities (TSF), the vast majority of companies are still unable to demonstrate that they are reviewing how effectively they are managing related risks.

The non-profit, funded by the Dutch and Swiss governments and some small philanthropic organizations, argues that the most critical issue is that very few mine sites show evidence of having informed local communities about what to do in the case of a tailings-related emergency.

VERY FEW MINE SITES SHOW EVIDENCE OF HAVING INFORMED LOCAL COMMUNITIES ABOUT WHAT TO DO IN THE CASE OF A TAILINGS-RELATED EMERGENCY

Responsible Mining FoundationUntil recently, there were no set of universal rules defining exactly what a tailings dam is, how to build one and how to care for it after it is decommissioned.

Some previous effort in that direction includes the World Mine Tailings Failures, an online database aimed at exposing the cause of tailing dams disasters, giving direction on how to prevent them.

Over the past year, a number of initiatives aiming at setting global standards have materialized.

The International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM), a London-based industry group representing 27 major mining companies, has set an independent panel of experts in charge of developing global standards for tailings facilities.

The Church of England, which invests in mining companies through its pensions for retired clergy, along with its partners, launched in April 2019 a global inquiry into mining waste storage systems of more than 700 resources companies.

It now asks companies to disclose data on tailings dams on a regular basis.

The RMF says in its report that while a global standard on tailings management is a welcome initiative, it could be significantly strengthened to become a real game-changer in terms of tailings safety.

Tailings dam disasters have claimed hundreds of lives.That would involve setting out clear requirements on points such as public disclosure of key information, engagement with local stakeholders, strong mitigation measures to address the risks posed by existing TSF, as well as broader accountability for senior management and boards of directors.

Global rules should also respect Free Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) as mandatory where new or expanded TSF are located in areas with indigenous peoples, the report says. It also recommends banning disposal of tailings in lakes, rivers and oceans.

Despite the collective call for action, the status quo may prevail. That’s more or less what happened in Canada after a dam at the Mount Polley copper and gold mine failed in 2014, dumping almost 24 million cubic metres of slurry into nearby glacial lakes and rivers.

Taken from: RMI Report 2020.An independent panel in charge of looking into the incident noted the mining industry’s storage practices had “not fundamentally changed in the past hundred years.”
​
Among the panel’s recommendations: Wherever possible, tailings should be stored dry, though it acknowledged retrofitting existing tailings impoundments isn’t always possible and can have risks. At Mount Polley, mining waste was still pumped into ponds by the time Imperial Metals put the operation into care and maintenance.

​https://www.mining.com/miners-response-to-brazils-dam-disaster-still-weak-report/