Taseko Calls on Federal Minister to Approve New Prosperity
Prince George, B.C.- Taseko Mines, owners of the New Prosperity mine project southwest of Williams Lake, has sent a letter to the Federal Minister of the Environment, Leona Aglukkaq.
It is Aglukkaq who will have the final say on the future of the project, based on whether or not the project “is likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects” .
The company contends the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency used incorrect information about the tailings pond, relying on a report from Natural Resources Canada which examined the wrong design.
Taseko also contends that error led the CEAA to conclude the water quality in Fish Lake would be negatively affected. It is an error, Taseko says “is so outrageous as to be nearly unfathomable”.
In it’s 15 page letter to the Minister, the company details the error, and the fact the CEAA’s executive summary on the proposed project failed to mention any of the positive findings about the proposal, “We believe this has seriously, and unjustifiably, distorted public understanding of the report” says the letter.
The letter also notes Taseko has spent more than $100 million and has been in the environmental review process ( at one stage or another) for more than 18 years. The letter says if the project is not allowed to move forward there could be significant negative impact on future investments in Canada, “we believe Canadians and international investors would be left to wonder whether any major project can be developed in this country going forward.”
Comments
Suck it up Taseko! If you had taken the Environmental Assessment Review Assessment standards seriously, and consulted in a meaningful way with local First Nations, your first proposal to use Fish Lake as a tailings pond would have never been submitted.
Instead you tried to steamroll your way through and got nowhere! Now we see you trying to take the “political” approach trying to get the Ministry of Environment (who is Aboriginal herself) to overrule the Environmental Assessment review process. If she does this, there could be dire repercussions!
It’s not too late to try a more professional, sensitive and civil approach like New Gold or Thompson Creek Metals approach! Here, this is free advice to you, read the following carefully, in it you just might find a path to the proper approach!!!
http://jobs.applyfirst.ca/jobs/47887
“there could be significant negative impact on future investments in Canada”
I love corporate threats!
It still amazes me that in this day and age a corporation still would think that destruction of a natural lake is somehow beneficial. Just because they can get away with it in other parts of the world doesn’t mean this crap is going to fly here. They should’ve learned from the Kemess North proposal that destruction of a lake isn’t going to win you any friends.
Only allow mining to be conducted in third world countries where there little or no environmental laws. Out of sight, out of mind
No, only allow a mine when it doesn’t unnecessarily destroy the environment around it for generations to come. There are lots of mines that can operate within the environmental curtain. It just costs more money and some mines try to cheapskate the process for a bigger bottom line. If the mine is viable they will concede to the laws and spend the extra couple of billion, if they unwilling to go that step then the mine probably wasn’t going to create much for our economy anyways.
Comments for this article are closed.