First Nations Vow to Stop Site C

Friday, October 05, 2007 03:58 AM

Last week Premier Gordon Campbell announced the province will be getting serious about the development of Site “C” . This is the project that would dam the Peace River upstream from Taylor. (photo at left is of the Peace River at Taylor)

The Premier may find the government will be butting heads with First Nations.

First Nations’ people from B.C., Alberta, Saskatchewan and the Northwest Territories came together with community and environmental groups in Ft. St. John last week to declare their “intent to protect the Arctic Drainage Basin” including the Peace, Athabasca, Liard and other northern waterways.

“Water should not be bought or sold, it is the lifeblood for us all,” said Chief Roland Willson of the West Moberly First Nations. “We will continue to build power until we are heard by governments. Support of other First Nations and local citizens is critical, particularly as the British Columbia government is renewing plans to develop the Site C dam on the Peace River.”

“We came together and agreed that we must stand united if there is any chance to protect our precious water resources,” said Pat Marcel, an elder with the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation. “This broad coalition of First Nations, community groups and environmental organizations might finally turn the tide in protecting our water,” he added. When asked about Site C, Elder Pat Marcel said “we will stand beside our neighbours 150% to stop the Site C dam.”

Site "C" has been on and off the books for decades. Thought to be a complement to the already existing WAC Bennett and Peace Canyon Dams, Site "C" has come under a lot of fire from environmentalists because it would flood one of the prime agricultural areas of the Peace Valley.

Then there is the matter of cost. The dollar figures initially discussed were in the $3 billion dollar range, but that price tag in today’s figures could be as high as $6 billion dollars.

BC Hydro is going over the project data, reviewing its estimates, and hopes to have new figures to release by the end of the month.

Previous Story - Next Story

Email |

Print |

Facebook |

Twitter |

Digg |

Del.icio.us

Posted on Friday, October 05, 2007 03:58 AM in News by 250 News

Return to Home

Comments

Posted by: RRrabbitt on October 5 2007 6:17 AM

Well folks.... nothing like a common objective to meld people together... of course, it also serves as a diversion from less important matters.

A coalition of opposition is great... until the internal power struggle bubbles to the surface.

There is certainly pro and con to this issue... sanity and insanity... as there has always been.

I will side with Mother on this one.

Blessings

Posted by: acrider54 on October 5 2007 6:26 AM

Was there any doubt?

Posted by: diplomat on October 5 2007 8:24 AM

"�Water should not be bought or sold, it is the lifeblood for us all,� said Chief Roland Willson of the West Moberly First Nations."

Is this about damming a river and producing electricity or is it about buying and selling water?

Of course, there are always solar, wind, tidal and wave power options, not to mention the standby ones of coal burning and nuclear, so flooding such a large area of prime land isn't a good idea unless all the others have been considered first and ruled out as totally impractical, which of course they are not.

Posted by: acrider54 on October 5 2007 5:34 PM

I believe BCH purchased all the land years ago and leased it back to the farmers for around a buck a year. Correct me if I'm wrong please.

Posted by: lunarguy on October 5 2007 7:05 PM

BCH owns the majority of the land required that is true, but of course that doesn't negate the fact that the land is some of the most prime farmland in BC. So much for the ALR and trying to keep farmland as farmland. Long term though I believe this is the best option as far as an environmental way of generating power.

Posted by: owl on October 7 2007 8:44 PM

"I believe this is the best option as far as an environmental way of generating power."

Does anyone here have an objective assessment of the cost benefit analysis of the several ways to generate electricity? By that I mean the TOTAL cost of generating electricity, including loss of opportunity in farming prime land, as one of the for instances, as well as cleaning up the air with the burning of fossil and other carbon based fuels such as wood - CO2; PM; etc.