First Nations

TASEKO MINES LIMITED PROSPERITY GOLD-COPPER PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/APPLICATION

VOLUME INDEX

VOLUME ONE SUMMARY REPORT PROJECT PLANNING & ALTERNATIVES ASSESSMENT The Proponent VOLUME TWO Regulatory Context Information Distribution and Consultation Assessment of Alternatives Environmental Assessment Methods Permits, Licenses and Approvals PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND SCOPE OF PROJECT Project Setting and Land Use Context VOLUME THREE Geology including ARD/ML Mine Plan Fisheries Compensation Plan Environmental Management Program Commitments PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT VOLUME FOUR Atmospheric Environment Acoustic Environment Surface Water Hydrology/Hydrogeology BIOTIC ENVIRONMENT Water Quality and Aquatic Ecology VOLUME FIVE Fish and Fish Habitat Terrain and Soils Vegetation Wildlife SOCIO-ECONOMICS, HUMAN HEALTH & ECOLOGICAL RISK Economic Issues Social Issues VOLUME SIX Community and Health Services Effects on Resource Uses Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment Navigable Waters VOLUME SEVEN ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HERITAGE RESOURCES VOLUME EIGHT FIRST NATIONS

VOLUME NINE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS PURSUANT TO CEAA Accidents Malfunctions and Unplanned Events Effects of the Environment on the Project Capacity of Renewable Resources

TASEKO PROSPERITY GOLD-COPPER PROJECT

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/APPLICATION

VOLUME 8: FIRST NATIONS

March 2009

Table of Contents

1 Introduction and Summary ...... 1-1 1.1 Introduction ...... 1-1 1.2 Summary ...... 1-3 2 First Nations ...... 2-5 2.1 Background ...... 2-5 2.1.1 Environmental Assessment History for the Prosperity Project...... 2-5 2.1.2 Taseko Mines Activities in the Region ...... 2-7 2.1.3 Regional Study Area for Consideration of First Nations Issues ...... 2-8 2.2 First Nations History in the Area ...... 2-11 2.2.1 Overview of Historical First Nation’s Reserves and Traditional Governments located within the RSA...... 2-11 2.2.2 Resources Development History in the Regional Study Area ...... 2-16 2.2.3 BC Treaty Process and Rights and Title Claims ...... 2-20 2.3 Overview of Existing Conditions by First Nation ...... 2-25 2.3.1 Tsilhqot’in ...... 2-25 2.3.2 Secwepemc ...... 2-32 2.4 Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Land Use ...... 2-38 2.4.1 Introduction to Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Land Use ...... 2-38 2.4.2 Methodology ...... 2-39 2.4.3 Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Land Use for the Tsilhqot’in People .. 2-41 2.4.4 Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Land Use for the Northern Secwepemc ...... 2-53 2.4.5 Traditional Knowledge and Land Use in the Effects Assessment and Project Design ...... 2-60 2.5 Taseko’s Engagement and Consultation ...... 2-66 2.5.1 Engagement and Consultation Core Values ...... 2-67 2.5.2 Engagement and Consultation Objectives ...... 2-67 2.5.3 First Nations Agreements ...... 2-67 2.5.4 Overview of Prosperity’s First Nation Engagement and Consultation Activities ...... 2-68 2.6 Identified First Nations Issues and Concerns ...... 2-75 2.6.1 Key Issues: Relationship to Aboriginal Rights ...... 2-75 2.6.2 Project Effects and Mitigation ...... 2-77 2.7 Community Interest and Benefits ...... 2-101 2.7.1 Introduction ...... 2-101 2.7.2 Taseko Mines Overarching Commitments to the People in Local and Regional Study Area ...... 2-101 2.7.3 Taseko Commitments to Local First Nations Individuals and Communities for Opportunity and Benefit ...... 2-103 2.7.4 Taseko’s Long-term First Nation Engagement and Consultation Strategy ..... 2-106 3 References ...... 3-1 4 Appendices ...... 4-1

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page i Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Table of Contents

List of Tables

Table 2-1 Taseko’s Five Main Project Elements within assumed Traditional Territories . 2-10 Table 2-2 Tsilhqot’in Residential Groups and Seasonal Movements (Tsilhqot’in Nation vs. British Columbia Appendix 3 [Government of British Columbia 2007a]; Alexander 1997)...... 2-43 Table 2-3 Seasonal Subsistence Rounds of the Shuswap (Secwepemc 2008; Alexander 1997; Wolf and Matthew 1996; Jack et al. 1993) ...... 2-54 Table 2-4 Summary of Key Environmental Concerns by First Nations: Wildlife ...... 2-78 Table 2-5 Summary of Key Environmental Concerns by First Nations: Fish and Fish Habitat ...... 2-80 Table 2-6 Summary of Key Environmental Concerns by First Nations: Water Contamination ...... 2-82 Table 2-7 Summary of Key Environmental Concerns by First Nations: Air and Dust Contamination ...... 2-84 Table 2-8 Summary of Key Environmental Concerns by First Nations: Other Hazards and Nuisance Effects ...... 2-86 Table 2-9 Summary of Key Environmental Concerns by First Nations: Increased Access ...... 2-88 Table 2-10 Summary of Key Environmental Concerns by First Nations: Post closure and Reclamation ...... 2-90 Table 2-11 Summary of Key Socio-economic Concerns by First Nations: Archaeological and Heritage Resources ...... 2-92 Table 2-12 Summary of Key Socio-economic Concerns by First Nations: Socio-economic...... 2-94 Table 2-13 Summary of Key Socio-economic Concerns by First Nations: Financial ...... 2-96 Table 2-14 Summary of Key Regulatory Issues Concerns by First Nations: EA Process ... 2-98 Table 2-15 Summary of Key Socio-economic Concerns by First Nations: Consultation .. 2-100

List of Figures

Figure 2-1 Proposed Prosperity Gold-Copper Project Mine Site and Offsite Infrastructure in Relation to First Nations Traditional Territories, Rights and Title Area and Communities—Regional Context ...... 2-6 Figure 2-2 Tsilhqot’in Territory Circa 1850AD with Current Reserves ...... 2-12 Figure 2-3 Band Locations of the Secwepemc in 1909 ...... 2-15 Figure 2-4 Aboriginal Title and Rights Areas—Tsilhqot’in Nation v. British Columbia, 2007 BCSC 1700...... 2-24 Figure 2-5 Tsilhqot’in Place Names in the Regional Study Area ...... 2-45 Figure 2-6 Photograph of the Settlement at Little Fish Lake ...... 2-47

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page ii Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Acronyms and Abbreviations

BCEAA ...... British Columbia Environmental Assessment Act BCTC ...... British Columbia Treaty Commission CCLUP ...... Cariboo-Chilcotin Land Use Plan CCTC ...... Carrier-Chilcotin Tribal Council CEA Act ...... Canadian Environmental Assessment Act CEAA ...... Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency CTC ...... Cariboo Tribal Council DFO ...... Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada EA ...... Environmental Assessment EAO ...... British Columbia Environmental Assessment Office EIS ...... Environmental Impact Statement ICC ...... Indian Claims Commission KM ...... Kilometre(s) MDA ...... Mine Development Act NSTC ...... Northern Shuswap Tribal Council NStQ ...... Northern Secwepemc te Qelmucw NTFP ...... Non-timber Forest Products PRS ...... Project Report Specifications ROW ...... Right of Way RSA ...... Regional Study Area SNTC ...... Shuswap Nation Tribal Council SRMP(s) ...... Sustainable Resource Management Plans TNG ...... Tsilhqot’in National Government

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page iii Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Table of Contents

First Nations

Tsilhqot’in (Chilcotin) Used in this Report ...... Full Name ?Esdilagh (Alexandria) ...... ?Esdilagh (Alexandria Indian Band) Tl’esqox (Toosey) ...... Tl’esqox (Toosey Indian Band) Tl’etinqox-t’in (Anaham) ...... Tl’etinqox-t’in Government Office (Anaham Indian Band) Tsi Del Del (Alexis Creek) ...... Tsi Del Del (Alexis Creek Indian Band) Ulkatcho ...... Ulkatcho First Nation Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah) ...... Xeni Gwet’in First Nations Gov’t ...... (Nemiah Valley Indian Band) Yunesit’in (Stone) ...... Yunesit’in Government (Stone Indian Band)

Secwepemc (Shuswap) Used in this Report ...... Full Name Esketemc (Alkali) ...... Esketemc First Nation (Alkali Lake Indian Band) Llenlleney’ten (High Bar) ...... Llenlleney’ten (High Bar First Nation) Stswecem’c/Xgat’tem (Canoe Creek) ...... Stswecem’c/Xgat’tem (Canoe Creek/Dog ...... Creek Indian Band) T’exelcemc (Williams Lake) ...... T’exelcemc (Williams Lake Indian Band) Xat’sull/Cmetem (Soda Creek) ...... Xat’sull First Nation/Cmetem First Nation ...... (Soda Creek/Deep Creek Indian Bands)

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page iv Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 1: Introduction and Summary

1 Introduction and Summary

1.1 Introduction Taseko Mines Limited (“Taseko”) proposes to develop the Prosperity Gold-Copper Project, (the “Project”) a conventional open pit project that would involve a large open pit mine development with a 20 year operating life. Typical large-scale open pit mining equipment and conventional copper porphyry flotation processing would be used. In addition to the mine and associated tailings and waste rock areas, the project includes development of an onsite mill and support infrastructure, an approximately 125 km long power transmission line corridor, and a 2.8 km mine access road. A vital and necessary step in the development of a project of this nature involves the completion of an environmental assessment. Environmental assessment itself is a process whereby the environmental effects of a proposed project are predicted and assessed before decisions to proceed with development of the project are made. The two key purposes of an environmental assessment are to minimize or avoid adverse environmental effects before they occur and to serve as a vehicle whereby environmental factors are incorporated into project design and decisions are made with respect to project implementation. The environmental assessment for the Project began 16 years ago in 1993. This Environmental Impact Statement (“EIS”) has been prepared in response to and in accordance with the Project Report Specifications (“PRS”) issued by the British Columbia Environmental Assessment Office (“EAO”) in 1998 and the more recent EIS Guidelines issued by both the provincial EAO and the federal Minister of the Environment in January of 2009. Both the PRS and the EIS Guidelines were subject to regulatory agency, First Nation and public comment and review before being finalized. This volume, Volume 8: First Nations is one of a nine volume series of reports that together constitute Taseko’s Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate pursuant to the British Columbia Environmental Assessment Act (BCEAA) and an EIS for submission to the Federal Review Panel pursuant to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA). The information contained within the volume is complete and comprehensive on the subjects discussed. In most instances within this particular volume there are linkages to information contained and predictions and assessments undertaken in many of the other eight volumes. Accordingly it is important to appreciate that the reader must take into consideration the content and assessments contained within all nine volumes in order to fully consider the complete environmental assessment undertaken thus far. Many of the nine volumes include either directly or indirectly by way of appendices a considerable volume of information collected by Taseko in support of this EIS. This volume, Volume 8: First Nations is intended to be a “stand alone” document drawing upon information found throughout many of the other volumes to provide a single source of information thought to be of interest, particularly to First Nations. Included within this volume, in accordance with the terms of the EIS Guidelines, is a historical overview of Taseko’s ongoing efforts to engage and exchange information with First Nations concerning their interests, issues and understanding of the Project. Where available publicly, information concerning First Nations land claims and rights and title March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 1-1 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 1: Introduction and Summary

matters, their history in the area, traditional knowledge and land use is also included. A summary of this information is provided in Section 2 below. Volume 1: Summary Report is a stand-alone document describing all the environmental effects of the Project and the proposed environmental management and mitigation measures. The significance of each environmental effect and a statement on the Project’s overall environmental effect is provided. Volume 2: Project Planning and Alternatives Assessment provides a historical account of a four year alternatives assessment process that was undertaken to find the most environmentally responsible, technically and economically achievable project plan. It was concluded at the end of this extensive process that the only technically and economically achievable alternative was the Project Plan that is the subject of this current environmental assessment. A 2008 update of economic information is included. Volume 3: Project Description and Scope of Project contains to a level of detail appropriate for an environmental assessment, Taseko’s information concerning the regional and local geology and the project description. Detailed information concerning the mine plan, the proposed road access and transmission line is included. The volume also details the Acid Rock Drainage/Metal Leaching (ARD/ML) investigations and characterization program undertaken by Taseko and includes details of a proposed Fish Compensation Plan developed as an integral part of the overall Project to compensate for the unavoidable loss of fish and fish habitat in the Fish Creek watershed. Taseko’s proposed Environmental Management Program is outlined in sufficient detail to provide a framework upon which further, permit level details will be added at the appropriate time. This project description reflects the benefits of having undertaken extensive drilling and investigation of the mineral deposit, completion of two engineering feasibility studies and the filing of Instrument 43101 compliant information to regulators. Volume 4: Physical Environment considers potential environmental effects of the Project on the atmospheric, acoustic, surface water hydrology and hydrogeological aspects of the environment. A detailed summary of baseline information collected and assessed, key issues, effects assessment, mitigation measures, characterization of any residual project effects, cumulative effects and a discussion of any proposed follow-up monitoring for each of the above mentioned aspects is provided. Volume 5: Biotic Environment considers potential environmental effects of the Project on stream and lake water and sediment quality, periphyton, zooplankton and benthic invertebrate aquatic ecosystems, fish and fish habitat, terrain and soils, vegetation and wildlife aspects of the environment. A detailed summary of baseline information collected and assessed, key issues, effects assessment, mitigation measures, characterization of any residual project effects, cumulative effects and a discussion of any proposed follow-up monitoring for each of the above mentioned aspects is presented. Volume 6: Socio-Economics, Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment considers potential effects of the Project on economic, social, community and health services aspects. Effects of the Project on resource uses including forestry, agriculture and ranching, fishing, hunting, recreation, tourism and trapping are also assessed. Information concerning First Nations cultural heritage including an assessment of Project effects on traditional use is provided. Included in this volume is a human health and ecological risk assessment that considers the potential environmental effects of the Project on human health and terrestrial ecological health. A detailed summary of baseline information collected and assessed, key issues, effects assessment, mitigation measures,

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 1-2 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 1: Introduction and Summary

characterization of any residual project effects, cumulative effects and a discussion of any proposed follow-up monitoring for each of the above mentioned aspects is presented. Volume 7: Archaeological and Heritage Resources includes the results of an extensive Archaeological Impact Assessment (“AIA”) undertaken in the vicinity of the mine site. Archaeological resources within the proposed mine site area are identified and evaluated and the potential effects of the Project on these resources assessed. Recommendations concerning measures to mitigate unavoidable loss of these resources are included. While First Nations representatives were involved in the design and implementation of the AIA regrettably circumstances have not afforded Taseko the opportunity to share the results of this AIA with First Nations before including it in this EIS. Taseko’s understanding concerning the significance of the information reported and how to evaluate will improve with further dialogue with First Nations and the provincial Archaeology Branch. Volume 9: Additional Requirements Pursuant to CEAA contains a discussion on accidents, malfunctions and unplanned events and the effects of the environment on the Project. Information presented concerning accidents, malfunctions and unplanned events is further discussed in many of the other volumes where these events are assessed and the significance of any potential environmental effects determined.

1.2 Summary This volume provides a compilation of the potential effects of the Project on First Nations within the Regional Study Area (RSA) based on Taseko’s EA and on engagement and consultation activities. As directed by the provincial and federal governments, there are seven communities of Tsilhqot’in (Chilcotin) people and five communities of Secwepemc (Shuswap) people requiring consultation and engagement on the Project. They are the Tsilhqot’in communities of Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah), Yunesit’in (Stone), Tsi Del Del (Alexis Creek), ?Esdilagh (Alexandria), Tl’etinqox-t’in (Anaham) and Tl’esqox (Toosey), and the Secwepemc communities of Xat’sull/Cmetem (Soda Creek), Stswecem’c/Xgat’tem (Canoe Creek), T'exelcemc (Williams Lake), Esketemc (Alkali), and Llenlleney’ten (High Bar). The Tsilhqot’in members of Ulkatcho are also entitled to consultation, since they form part of the Tsilhqot’in Nation with Aboriginal rights that may be affected by the Project. This volume provides an overview of First Nations community demographics specifically looking at population, age, education, labour force, employment and unemployment and facilities and infrastructure. An overview of current and recent rights and title claims that overlap with components of the Project is also provided. Traditional knowledge was gathered from three primary sources: documents from the William case (Tsilhqot’in); the “Heritage Significance of the Fish Lake Study Area: Ethnography” (Xeni Gwet’in and Yunesit’in); and existing sources review (Tsilhqot’in and Secwepemc). Taseko began implementing its First Nations engagement and consultation strategy in 1993, with the First Nations communities in closest proximity to the proposed Project mine site; the access roads and transportation corridor; and the transmission line. During the late 1990s and from 2004 to 2008, nine Tsilhqot’in and Secwepemc communities were engaged with Taseko on the Project. Engagement with the Ulkatcho, Llenlleney’ten (High Bar) and Xat’sull/Cmetem (Soda Creek) communities was initiated later in 2008. The First Nations engagement and consultation records are summarized in tables in

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 1-3 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 1: Introduction and Summary

Appendix 8-2-A which clearly indicates the issues raised by the community leadership and members. All engagement and consultation concerns were categorized into “key issues” and each key issue was studied for effects. Key issues evolved into three main categories: environmental, socio-economic and regulatory. All key issues have been addressed through either the environmental assessment (EA) technical reports or within this volume. Mitigation is described when appropriate as well as Taseko’s commitments to the local First Nations. An overview of Taseko’s commitments to local and regional communities, including a new education and training initiative Mining: Your Future is provided. Taseko is open to full engagement and consultation with First Nations communities regarding their aboriginal and community interests and a strategy for long- term engagement and consultation with First Nations on the Project is provided in this volume.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 1-4 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

2 First Nations

2.1 Background Taseko proposes to develop the Project, which is located 125 km southwest of Williams Lake in South Central British Columbia. The general location of the Project is shown in Figure 2-1. This volume includes an assessment of the potential effects of the Project on First Nations within the Regional Study Area (“RSA”) based on Taseko’s engagement and consultation activities. All engagement and consultation concerns were categorized into “key issues” and each key issue was studied for effects on traditional land use and on First Nations communities. All key issues have been addressed through either the environmental assessment (“EA”) technical reports or within this volume. Mitigation is described when appropriate as well as Taseko’s commitments to the local First Nations. The First Nation engagement and consultation records are summarized in the “Tables of First Nations Engagement and Consultation” (Appendix 8-2-A) which clearly indicates the issues raised by the community leadership and members.

2.1.1 Environmental Assessment History for the Prosperity Project The Project is subject to review under the BCEAA, S.B.C. 2002, c.43 and the CEAA, SC 1992, c.37. The EA for the Project was first initiated in August 1993 through the filing of a “Pre-Application for A Mine Development Certificate” in accordance with the Mine Development Act (“MDA”). Two years later, in June 1995, the former BCEAA was proclaimed. By means of Transition Order No. M357, dated June 30, 1995, the Project was transferred to a new EA process. In 1995, a Prosperity Project Committee (the “Project Committee”), was formed, consisting of representatives of federal and provincial agencies, local governments and First Nations. The purpose of the Project Committee was to provide expertise regarding the EA process, as well as to provide expert review of the technical study reports conducted for the EA and the draft EA Report. The Project Committee also participated in establishing the consultation process for the Project, including consultation with First Nations. Taseko communicated with the Project Committee throughout the EA process regarding key Project milestones and updates. The Project Committee conducted seven meetings with Taseko from 1995 to 1999 to work to identify issues and develop the draft Project Report Specifications (“PRS”). In February 1998, a draft PRS was made available to the public for comment pursuant to Section 16 of BCEAA, and public forums, attended by members of the Project Committee, Taseko and the EAO, were held to discuss the issues, answer questions and hear comments. The final PRS, issued in April 1998, describes additional information required to identify and assess the potential effects of the Project (Appendix 2-5-A).

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-5 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Figure 2-1 Proposed Prosperity Gold-Copper Project Mine Site and Offsite Infrastructure in Relation to First Nations Traditional Territories, Rights and Title Area and Communities—Regional Context

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-6 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

In December 2002, Transition Order #02-12 was issued pursuant to sections 10(1), 24(2) and 51(5) of BCEAA. Subsequently, on October 21, 2005 a Time Limit Extension Order was issued and on April 5, 2007 the Executive Director ordered that the Project be referred to the Minister for a determination under s. 14 of the Act. In April 2007, Taseko met with federal, provincial and First Nation representatives and members of the Working Group to discuss the need for and to obtain input into an updated PRS that would be reflective of current conditions. Subsequent to this meeting agency and First Nation representatives responded with written comments which as appropriate were incorporated into revised EIS Guidelines. On June 22, 2008, the Minister, Honourable Barry Penner, pursuant to section 14 of the Act, ordered that the EA of the Project be conducted by the Executive Director. On October 17, 2008 the Executive Director issued an order under Section 14, directing that Taseko must finalize draft Application Terms of Reference to identify the issues to be addressed and the information to be provided in the Application. The contents of the PRS issued in April 1998, updated to reflect current conditions, formed the basis for the Application Terms of Reference/EIS Guidelines. The EAO and the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (“CEA Agency”) held a joint public comment period on Draft EIS Guidelines from November 3 to December 3, 2008. Following the close of the public comment period, Taseko responded to public and First Nation comments that had been received and the Draft EIS Guidelines were modified accordingly. The Application Terms of Reference/EIS Guidelines were finalized by the EAO and federal Minister of Environment respectively and forwarded to Taseko for use in development of this EIS.

2.1.2 Taseko Mines Activities in the Region The following section briefly describes Taseko’s mining activities taking place in the region, specifically looking at the Gibraltar Mine.

2.1.2.1 Gibraltar Taseko owns and operates the Gibraltar Mine which is located 15 km northeast of McLeese, British Columbia. The Gibraltar Mine is a copper-molybdenum mine and was put into operation in 1972. The mine was purchased by Taseko in July 1999. After six years of closure due to low commodity prices, the mine was re-opened in 2004. The mine operations resumed under a joint venture agreement with Ledcor Ltd. and by November 2006, Taseko voluntarily withdrew from the joint venture and assumed all responsibility for the mine. Procedures and policies were updated to reflect Taseko’s values. The Gibraltar Mine is located in an area with well-developed infrastructure. The area around the Gibraltar mine site is accessible by paved roads. It is close to a rail network that provides service for the shipment of copper concentrates through the port of Vancouver. The mine site is a 45 minute drive from Williams Lake, the closest community that provides goods and services. The mine site is located within the claimed traditional territory (the “Traditional Territory”) of two Secwepemc First Nations— Xat’sull/Cmetem (Soda Creek) and T’exelcemc (Williams Lake)—and one Tsilhqot’in First Nation—?Esdilagh (Alexandria). The Gibraltar Mine currently employs approximately 400 people. Since the restart of operations in 2004, Taseko has encouraged First Nations employment at Gibraltar Mine, and at the time of this report, approximately 12% of the workforce consists of First Nations, predominately from the region. This is comparable to the regional

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-7 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

demographics. The Gibraltar Mine will maintain this focus to encourage current and future First Nations employees from the region to take full advantage of opportunities for training provided by the Gibraltar Mine or Taseko.

2.1.2.2 Proposed Prosperity Project The Project deposit is located on the Fraser Plateau in the Taseko Lakes region within the Fish Creek watershed. Development of the mine site would occur on a 35 km2 parcel of Provincial Crown land in respect of which Taseko held 118 mineral claims at the time of submitting this report. Initial exploration activity in the vicinity of the Prosperity deposit was undertaken by prospectors in the early 1930s. In 1963 to 1964, Phelps Dodge conducted a small exploration drilling program. Taseko acquired the property in 1969 and exploration drilling continued in the 1970s and 1980s under option agreements with several mining companies. Taseko proceeded with extensive drilling, engineering, metallurgical and socioeconomic programs in 1991. The work carried out succeeded in delineating a bulk tonnage porphyry gold-copper mineral resource. By 1993, Taseko had advanced the Project and began the EA process. In 2000 the prevailing metal prices (copper price ranging from U.S. $0.60 to $0.80 per pound and gold price ranging from U.S. $250 to 300 per ounce) and a poor outlook for price performance resulted in the decision to delay advancing the Project. Work on the Project restarted in 2005 and has proceeded continuously since then. Construction is currently scheduled to begin in 2010 and the mine is scheduled to be in operation by 2012.

2.1.3 Regional Study Area for Consideration of First Nations Issues The RSA for First Nations is based on directions from the provincial and federal governments that Taseko engage and consult with the First Nations described below. Figure 2-1 is a map of the Project mine site and offsite infrastructure in relation to First Nations Traditional Territories. As noted by Mr. Justice Vickers in the recent William case, the Tsilhqot’in people are found in seven First Nation communities: Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah), Yunesit’in (Stone), Tsi Del Del (Alexis Creek), ?Esdilagh (Alexandria), Tl’etinqox-t’in Government Office (Anaham), Tl’esqox (Toosey), and Ulkatcho. The Tsilhqot’in National Government (“TNG”) was established in 1969, and represents four or five of the seven communities of the Tsilhqot’in people. At the time of submission of this report it appeared that the Tl’etinqox-t’in (Anaham) was no longer represented by the TNG. The TNG does not represent either the Tl’esqox (Toosey) or the Ulkatcho communities, who are represented by the Carrier Chilcotin Tribal Council (CCTC), although it appears that the Tl’esqox (Toosey) may work closely with the TNG. The five Secwepemc communities that have been engaged by Taseko for this project are Xat’sull/Cmetem (Soda Creek), Stswecem’c/Xgat’tem (Canoe Creek), T'exelcemc (Williams Lake), Esketemc (Alkali), and Llenlleney’ten (High Bar). Of these, Xat’sull/Cmetem (Soda Creek), Stswecem’c/Xgat’tem (Canoe Creek) and T'exelcemc (Williams Lake), are part of the Northern Shuswap Tribal Council (“NSTC”), a non- profit organization which is an association of autonomous member First Nations. This organization is also known as the Northern Secwepemc te Qelmucw (“NStQ”). The

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-8 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Esketemc (Alkali) and Llenlleney’ten (High Bar) are each considered independent, as they are not associated with the NSTC or the other main Secwepemc organization, the Shuswap Nation Tribal Council (“SNTC”). The RSA Project components consist of the proposed mine site; electric transmission line; access roads and transportation corridor; a concentrate loading facility; and fish compensation works. Each RSA Project component is described below.

2.1.3.1 Mine Site The mine development includes an open pit mine with a 20 year operating life, waste rock stockpiles, primary crusher and overland conveyor, the plant site, the tailings storage facility and maintenance, administrative and onsite support facilities. The mine site will be within the Traditional Territories of the Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah), the Tl’esqox (Toosey), the Yunesit’in (Stone), and the Esketemc (Alkali). The mine site is also within the area which is described in the recent William case as the “Eastern Trapline Territory” and in which Mr. Justice Vickers determined that the Tsilhqot’in people have Aboriginal rights to hunt and trap birds and animals as described in that judgment.

2.1.3.2 Electric Transmission Line The proposed 230 kV electric transmission line servicing the Prosperity Mine is 125 km long, with a 230 kV switching station at Dog Creek and at the mine site. It traverses Traditional Territories of four Secwepemc First Nations—the Stswecem’c/Xgat’tem (Canoe Creek), the T’exelcemc (Williams Lake), the Esketemc (Alkali) and the Llenlleney’ten (High Bar)—as well as the Traditional Territories of three Tsilhqot’in First Nations—the (Xeni Gwet’in First Nations Government (Nemiah), the Tl’esqox (Toosey) and the Yunesit’in (Stone).

2.1.3.3 Access Road and Transportation Corridor An existing access road currently exists to the mine site, with the exception of approximately 2.8 km of new road that would be required. The existing access road crosses Traditional Territories of Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah), Yunesit’in (Stone), Tl’esqox (Toosey), Tsi Del Del (Alexis Creek), Tl’etinqox-t’in Government Office (Anaham), and ?Esdilagh (Alexandria), and the 2.8 km of new road would appear to cross Traditional Territories of the Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah),, the Yunesit’in (Stone), and the Esketemc (Alkali).

2.1.3.4 Concentrate Loading Facility The concentrate loading facility is the existing Gibraltar Mine concentrate load-out facility near Macalister. The concentrate loading facility falls within the Traditional Territories of the Xat’sull/Cmetem (Soda Creek), the ?Esdilagh (Alexandria) and the T’exelcemc (Williams Lake).

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-9 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

2.1.3.5 Fish Compensation Works To compensate for the loss of Fish Lake and upstream and downstream spawning habitat, fish compensation works will be developed to be consistent with MOE Benchmark Statement and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) policies and legislation. These include: • a compensation lake (Prosperity Lake) in the Fish Creek watershed to provide for a self sustaining trout population to maintain the genetic integrity of the Fish Lake population • off channel habitat to offset the loss of lower Fish Creek fish resources • a fish culture facility to help maintain the Fish Lake genetic stock, provide angling opportunities in other lakes and within the context of government and First Nation agreements, will potentially provide First Nation harvest opportunities The fish compensation works are proposed within the Traditional Territories of the both the Tsilhqot’in and the Esketemc (Alkali). The community of the Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah), at approximately 30 km distance, is the closest community to the proposed mine site. Table 2-1 identifies First Nation Traditional Government in the RSA in relation to Project components.

Table 2-1 Taseko’s Five Main Project Elements within assumed Traditional Territories

First Nation Works Facility Corridor Corridor Mine Site Transportation Transportation Access Road & Road Access Transmission Line Transmission Fish Compensation Fish Compensation Concentrate Loading Concentrate

Tsilhqot’in Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah) (TNG) X X X X Yunesit’in (Stone ) (TNG) X X X X Tsi Del Del (Alexis Creek) (TNG)* Tl’etinqox-t’in ( Anaham) (formerly TNG) X ?Esdilagh (Alexandria) (TNG) X X Tl’esqox (Toosey) (CCTC) X X Ulkatcho (CCTC)* Secwepemc Xat’sull/Cmetem ( Soda Creek) (NSTC) X X Esketemc (Alkali) (Independent) X X X X

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-10 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Table 2-1 Taseko’s Five Main Project Elements within assumed Traditional Territories (cont’d)

Llenlleney’ten (High Bar) (Independent) X Stswecem’c/Xgat’tem (Canoe Creek) (NSTC) X T’exelcemc (Williams Lake) (NSTC) X X NOTE: * The Traditional Territories of Tsi Del Del (Alexis Creek) and Ulkatcho are understood not to be geographically located within the RSA. However those communities include Tsilhqot’in persons who have aboriginal rights throughout the Tsilhqot’in Traditional Territory.

2.2 First Nations History in the Area The following section identifies First Nations within the RSA, and provides an overview of First Nations history within the RSA.

2.2.1 Overview of Historical First Nation’s Reserves and Traditional Governments located within the RSA Figure 2-1 is a map of the Project mine site and offsite infrastructure in relation to First Nations Traditional Territories. The territorial claims shown on Figure 2-1 were taken from sources that Taseko considered to be appropriate, including publications of the BC Government, the website of Woodward & Company, and a map supplied by the Xat’sull/Cmetem (Soda Creek). All of the First Nations whose Traditional Territories are set out on this map were asked by Taseko to provide maps showing their Traditional Territories, but only Xat’sull/Cmetem (Soda Creek) provided a map to Taseko and authorized Taseko to use it for the purposes of this Application. This map provides the boundaries within the Project vicinity of: • Tsilhqot’in National Government (and for the purposes of this illustration includes Tl’etinqox-t’in (Anaham) • Carrier Chilcotin Tribal Council • Northern Shuswap Tribal Council • Esketemc (Alkali) • Llenlleney’ten (High Bar)

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-11 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Tsilhqot’in People The Tsilhqot’in (anglicized as Chilcotin) are a recognized ethnic group who are distinguished by a shared territory, language and culture (Muckle 1998). Tsilhqot’in are speakers of the Athapaskan language group that speak a distinct dialect (Lane 1981 in Ehrhart-English 1994). The term “Chilcotin” comes from a rendition of the Tsilhqot’in term for “people of the Chilko River” (Lane 1981 in Matson and Magne 2007). In the Tsilhqot’in Nation Declaration of Sovereignty it is stated that the Tsilhqot’in are “part of the greater nation of the Deni” (Muckle 1998). The first records of the Tsilhqot’in are from Simon Fraser in 1808 from his travels down the Fraser River while looking for trade routes (Fraser 1960 in Ehrhart-English 1994). At the time of contact the territory of the Tsilhqot’in extended from the upper Dean River north of Anahim Lake, southeast to the southern end of Chilko Lake, and to Coyote Rock, just east of Alexis Creek, totalling 28,000 km2 (Lane 1981 in Matson and Magne 2007). Figure 2-2 illustrates the pre-contact territory.

SOURCE: Lane 1953; 1981 and Teit 1909a in Matson and Magne 2007

Figure 2-2 Tsilhqot’in Territory Circa 1850AD with Current Reserves

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-12 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Prior to contact, the Tsilhqot’in may have been divided into four groups: • a large band wintering around Anahim Lake • the people occupying the area around Puntzi and Chezacut Lakes, and the lands west of Alexis Creek • the people south of the Chilcotin River and west of Big Creek (many of the lower Chilko River) • small bands wintering on Chilko and Tatla Lakes (Teit 1909a in Alexander 1996) In 1863 and 1864 the Tsilhqot’in suffered from smallpox epidemics that decimated the coastal and interior First Nations. The Canyon Secwepemc were also devastated by the epidemic, and moved south in their territory. This allowed the Tsilhqot’in to move south to Riske Creek (previously Secwepemc territory), which became the Toosey Indian Reserve. The smallpox epidemic is thought to have been a contributor to the Chilcotin War. In 1863, Alfred Waddington began building a road that would pass right through the Nemiah Valley, as a faster route to the Cariboo goldfields (Matson and Magne 2007). In 1864, the Tsilhqot’in attacked the road crew and killed 12 of the 16 men (Rothenburger 1978). The war was the greatest act of violence in First Nations history west of the Rocky Mountains. In the end, the road was not built and the Tsilhqot’in declared victory (Littlemore 2000). After the war, the Tsilhqot’in moved into the Nemiah Valley and area. Prior to this time, the Tsilhqot’in had lived further to the west. By 1909 the Tsilhqot’in were recognized as comprising three groups: the Lower Chilcotin, the Stone Chilcotin and the Upper Chilcotin. The Lower Chilcotin was composed of three bands: the Anaham Band on the north side of the Chilcotin River, the Toosey Band on Riske Creek, and the Alexandria Band at Alexandria. The Stone Chilcotin occupied a village on the south side of the Chilcotin River. The Upper Chilcotin lived in small, scattered communities around Chezacut, Puntzi, Anahim, Tatla, Chilko and other nearby lakes (Teit 1909a in Alexander 1996). Farrand (1900) notes that many Tsilhqot’in still lived a semi-nomadic life, versus the Tsilhqot’in who had settled in the reservations. As noted, the TNG may currently represent four member bands - ?Esdilagh (Alexandria), Tsi Del Del (Alexis Creek), Yunesit'in (Stone) and Xeni Gwet'in (Nemiah). At the time of this report, Tl’etinqox-t’in (Anaham) may have withdrawn from the TNG. The Tl’esqox (Toosey) may work closely with the TNG but the Tl’esqox (Toosey) is a member of the CCTC. The Ulkatcho are represented by the Carrier Chilcotin Tribal Council and their Traditional Territory is understood to not overlap with any of the Project components; however, as many of the Ulkatcho members are Tsilhqot’in, their interest in the Project has been recognized.

Secwepemc People The Secwepemc are part of the Interior Salish people of British Columbia. There are three dialects of the Secwepemc language: Northern, Kamloops and Chase (Bouchard and Kennedy 1979). The term Shuswap comes from the anglicized Secwepemc, which is Salish (Secwepemc Cultural Education Society and SFU 1999). At pre-contact, the

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-13 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Secwepemc occupied the territory from the Columbia River Valley to west of the Fraser River and south to the Arrow Lakes, comprising 180,000 km2 (Wolf and Matthew 1996). The first Euro-Canadian contact of the Secwepemc was likely with Alexander Mackenzie, who travelled to the upper reaches of the Fraser River in 1793, and then with Simon Fraser, who travelled to the mouth of the Fraser River in 1808. Sustained contact began around 1816 through involvement in the fur trade. The traditional culture changed by the heavy inflow of settlers in 1858 and the subsequent smallpox epidemic of 1862 to 1863 that destroyed much of the Secwepemc population. Around 1900, the Secwepemc were described as being comprised of 19 bands organized into 7 divisions (Secwepemc Cultural Education Society and Simon Fraser University (SFU) 1999, Ignace 1998): • Fraser River division—included people from High Bar to Soda Creek • Canon [Canyon]division—area west of the Fraser River from Churn Creek to Riske Creek • Lake division—area between the Fraser River division and the North Thompson division with their man village at Canim Lake • Kinbaskets division—both sides of the Columbia River, north to Golden and bordered by the Shuswap Lake division in the west and the Stone people to the east • Kamloops division—confluence of the North and South Thompson Rivers, and those who lived west to the Bonaparte River • Shuswap Lake division—area surrounding the upper South Thompson, Shuswap Lakes and the Spallumcheen River • Bonaparte (North Thompson) division—people who occupied the Bonaparte River valley in the area of Cache Creek, Hat Creek and Loon Lake

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-14 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Figure 2-3 Band Locations of the Secwepemc in 1909

The divisions were territorial units. These seven divisions are no longer recognized. The existing 17 bands are recognized as synonymous with the reserves they occupy. The First Nations residing in the northern and western reaches of Secwepemc territory were greatly influenced by northwest coastal groups in the nineteenth century and developed a social class system. Today there is a consensus among the present day Secwepemc that they do not recognize divisions (Brow 1972). Although there are several First Nations and different government structures, the Secwepemc possess a single language and a common sense of identity (Brow 1972). The Secwepemc (Shuswap) consists of 17 First Nations and are represented by two tribal councils: the Northern Shuswap Tribal Council (“NSTC”) and the Shuswap Nation Tribal Council. The NSTC, formerly the Cariboo Tribal Council and sometimes known as the NStQ, is comprised of four northern member communities located around the Williams Lake area: T'exelcemc (Williams Lake), Stswecem'c/Xgat'tem (Canoe Creek), Tsq'escen' (Canim Lake) and the Xat’sull/Cmetem (Soda Creek). The Shuswap Nation Tribal Council represents 10 of the remaining 13 Secwepemc First Nations with 3 having independent status (Haagan 2008). Esketemc (Alkali) and Llenlleney’ten (High Bar)

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-15 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

are 2 independent Secwepemc First Nations whose Traditional Territories overlap components of the Project.

2.2.2 Resources Development History in the Regional Study Area The primary economic activity in the region is from traditional forest industries and associated businesses: forest management, harvest and processing of wood fibre products. Agriculture, mining and tourism also make important contributions, and government services (e.g., health, education, Crown resource management and social services) are an important source of employment, particularly for providing professional and management positions (Powell 2005). This section provides regional profiles of forestry, agriculture, mining and geology, and land use planning that occurs in the RSA, and First Nations involvement in these economic and land use planning activities.

History of Forestry The forest industry is a major economic driver in the RSA (Government of British Columbia 2005 and 2007). The primary economic activity in the region is from traditional forest industries and associated businesses including forest management, harvest, and processing of wood fibre products. The Cariboo and Chilcotin forest industry’s manufacturing facilities are concentrated within the communities of 100 Mile House, Clinton, Williams Lake, Anahim Lake and Quesnel. These facilities rely upon a fibre supply which is accessed across the entire Cariboo area. The forest industry in the Cariboo-Chilcotin region provides direct wages for thousands of residents; this work has directed economic activity and spurred continued growth throughout the region, particularly in larger centres such as Williams Lake, Quesnel and 100 Mile House (Government of British Columbia 1995). The forest industry provided 8470 full time jobs in 2001 for the region as a whole (Government of British Columbia 2005 and 2007). Forestry plays an important contribution to the regional economy. According to the 2001 Lake Timber Supply Analysis Report, the capital employed in these regional facilities totals 946 million dollars (Government of British Columbia 2005). A total of 78 million dollars in capital expenditures was made in maintaining and improving these facilities. The forest industry within the RSA is diverse. The regional facilities include: • 12 sawmills • 4 plywood/veneer plants • 1 oriented strand board plant • 1 medium density fibreboard plant • 2 pulp mills • numerous value-added manufacturing facilities • associated logging operations (Government of British Columbia 2005 and 2007) The major industrial forest operators in the mine site and transmission right of way (“ROW”) are Tolko Industries Ltd. and British Columbia Timber Sales. Sigurdson Brothers Logging Ltd. and other small timber tenure holders may also initiate planning activities in the vicinity (Volume 6, Section 5). A list of tenure holders (including First Nations) is presented in the Volume 6, Section 5 (Appendix 5-C; Tables 5–22 and 5–23). March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-16 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

There are also several First Nations logging operations active in the area including Yun ka whu’ten Holdings Ltd., Tsi del del Enterprises Ltd., Esketemc First Nation, Klatassine Resources Ltd and Tl’etinqox Logging Ltd. The transmission ROW crosses two area based tenures, a woodlot held by an individual and a community forest held by the Esketemc First Nation. Additional short term timber tenures will be tendered to accommodate the recent AAC increase. This is expected to occur over the next several years and could add new forest licensees to the planning area (Volume 6, Section 5). The TNG, in a joint venture, is in the pre-application phase of the EA process to build and operate a 60 MW forest based biomass energy project (Volume 6, Section 5). The plant, with a proposed location adjacent to the Sigurdson sawmill east of Hanceville, would utilize the non-merchantable pine killed by the Mountain Pine Beattle. The proposed in-service date is 2012. The plant would consume a significant volume of fibre harvested from stands within an economic haul distance from the thermal plant. (Volume 6, Section 5).

Non-timber Forest Products Forested lands may produce a range of other products in addition to commercial timber. Non-timber forest products (“NTFP”) include mushrooms, berries, floral and/or decorative materials, as well as medicinal plants. The harvest may have commercial value (e.g., pine mushrooms), or may be utilized as traditional foods, medicines and crafts (Powell 2005). Pine mushrooms are harvested mostly around Anahim Lake (Volume 6, Section 5). The regional profile of non-timber forest products being harvested from the Cariboo- Chilcotin, British Columbia area (Powell 2005) profiles the commercial and First Nation’s use of NTFP harvested from the Cariboo-Chilcotin. The primary economic activity in the region is from traditional forest industries. None of the region’s First Nations currently have band-owned NTFP-based businesses; however, First Nations individuals are known to work in commercial arts and crafts production, wild mushroom harvesting and NTFP-based ecotourism.

History of Agriculture The agriculture sector is an important part of the entire Cariboo Region local economy and employs about eight percent of the local labour force (Government of British Columbia 2005 and 2007). Agriculture plays an important contribution to the regional economy with approximately $55 million in annual (1998) farm gate sales (from 1187 farms), which account for 3% of the provincial agricultural output. Ranching is the primary agricultural activity in the region, accounting 60% of the regional farm-gate sales. The ranching industry is highly dependent on access to crown forage resources managed through the Ministry of Forests and Range. Other important agricultural production includes forages, potatoes, honey, dairy products, sheep, horses, poultry and market gardens producing a variety of fruits and vegetables. No large-scale food and beverage processing businesses are located in the region; however, small scale commercial food processing occurs throughout the region. Quesnel, 100 Mile House and Williams Lake have seasonal Farmer’s Markets which are an important direct-to-consumer marketing outlet for primary and value-added agricultural production (Powell 2005).

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-17 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

The Project will result in one licensee at the mine site and one First Nations rancher to alter the grazing patterns for their animals, and have a minor, but positive, effect on forage availability along the transmission corridor (Volume 6, Section 5).

History of Mining and Geology Mining and mineral products businesses make a small, but important contribution to the regional economy. Businesses in the sector are principally involved in the exploration and development of aggregate (sand and gravel) and mineral (primarily gold and copper) mines and employ 1.7% of the regional workforce (Powell 2005). The industry is characterized by two large metal mining operations in the eastern Cariboo (Imperial Metals Corp’s Mount Polley Mine and Taseko’s Gibraltar Mine), numerous small placer gold extraction or mineral exploration operations, and an abundance of Crown and privately owned aggregate pits. QR Gold Mine, a large-scale gold operation under development east of Quesnel, has completed the first phase of its exploration program and properties adjacent to the Gibraltar and Mount Polley mine sites are being assessed for commercial development. Both Imperial Metals and Taseko have encouraged First Nations employment at the mount Polley and Gibraltar Mines, respectively. At the time of this Report, approximately 12% of the Gibraltar workforce consists of First Nations predominately from the region, which is comparable to the regional demographics. Other mining operations in the region include: • a Canadian Pacific Railway mine for railway ballast north of Quesnel • a pumice and aggregate mine in volcanic deposits near Nazko operated by Canada Pumice Corporation • diatomaceous earth mining by Dialite Industries in Quesnel Seismic exploration for petroleum reserves has been completed in the West Fraser/North Chilcotin districts, but no oil and gas developments are active in the region.

History of Land Use Planning (Cariboo-Chilcotin Land Use Plan) The Project is located in the Cariboo-Chilcotin District, an area that contains a mix of rural agricultural lands, small acreage holdings and crown forest lands. Working directly with the people of the Cariboo-Chilcotin, the Government of British Columbia announced the Cariboo-Chilcotin Land Use Plan (“CCLUP”) on October 4, 1994. The CCLUP fulfills the need for a regional plan to provide “certainty and sustainability for the range of land and resource uses and values” (Government of British Columbia 1995). It presents the overall framework for land use, conservation and economic development in the region. The CCLUP was developed to incorporate the interests and meet the needs of the community (Government of British Columbia 1995) and builds on work conducted between January 1992 and July 1994 by the Commission on Resources and Environment, which allowed people a direct say over land use plans for their region. The CCLUP addresses long-term concerns around sustaining the regions’ economy. This involves access to timber for the local forest industry, certainty for the mining, ranching and tourism industries and job security. Its goal is to sustain the region’s environment by protecting the natural landscapes that make the Cariboo unique. It provides broad direction for sustainable use of Crown Land and resources in this region. The plan divides the area in to four zones:

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-18 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

• Enhanced Resources Development Zone • Integrated Resource Management Zone • Special Resource Development Zone • Protected Areas The Project area is located within an Integrated Resource Management Zone, within which the following conditions apply: • some specific sites within this zone will be appropriate for enhanced resource use • forestry, mineral/placer exportation and mining development, cattle grazing, tourism, wild craft/agro-forestry (harvesting of non-fibre forest resources, such as mushrooms and berries), recreation, fishing, trapping and hunting are appropriate activities • management objectives for this zone aim to integrate all First Nations values: social, environmental and economic More specific to mineral exploration and mine development, the CCLUP states that: “The mineral and placer industries will have full access to all three zones (not Protected Areas) for exploration and mine development, subject to regulations of applicable statutes. Full access means that all (100%) of the land outside of protected areas is available to exploration and development, guided by the Mineral Tenure Act and the Mines Act. This respects the industries’ requirement for as large a land base as possible to explore for “hidden” resources and recognizes that the more intensive activities and impacts tend to be focused on the relatively small areas found to have potential for economically viable mineral occurrences.” The CCLUP also addresses the delivery of targets at the sub-regional planning level that were not addressed in the integration process. Included within this section are the following commitments by the CCLUP to the mining industry’s access to the land base: • the mineral and placer industries will have full access to all three zones for exploration and mine development, subject to regulations of applicable statutes • in the Special Resource Development Zone, mineral exploration and mining development will be carried out in a manner that respects sensitive natural values

First Nations Involvement and Consideration in Developing the CCLUP In respect to working with First Nations, the province is committed to working on a government-to-government basis without limiting aboriginal rights or treaty negotiations (Government of British Columbia 2005). The province has carried out a policy that offers First Nations opportunities to be involved in the planning process. As well, the CCLUP encourages First Nations to have direct involvement in the implementation of the plan. While some First Nations participated in the consultation process to develop the land use plan; others declined and indicated their preference to address their issues through treaty negotiations (Government of British Columbia 1995). The CCLUP contains seven sustainable resource management plans (“SRMP”) which provide spatial reference and detailed objectives needed to carry out the CCLUP (Government of British Columbia 2005 and 2007), and are important elements in CCLUP implementation. In particular, the Williams Lake Sustainable Resource Management Plan (Government of British March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-19 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Columbia 2005) and the Chilcotin Sustainable Resource Management Plan (Government of British Columbia 2007b) address First Nations in the Project area. These two SRMPs are literature reviews that are not based on interviews with First Nations; however, they reviewed archaeological overview assessments and the following Traditional Land Use Studies: A Cultural Heritage Overview of the Cariboo Forest Region (1997) and A Cultural Heritage Overview of the Western Half of the Williams Lake Forest District (1996). These two land use studies were conducted on behalf of the Ministry of Forests who wanted a cultural heritage overview in order to help them assess the potential existence of aboriginal rights in proposed management areas where the First Nations of concern have been unable or unwilling to provide requested traditional knowledge information. They extensively cover historical patterns of band membership, subsistence and settlement patterns, and cultural practices of aboriginal groups in the area. The following First Nations have Traditional Territory within the Williams Lake SRMP: T’exelcemc (Williams Lake), Xat’sull/Cmetem (Soda Creek), Tsq’escen (Canim Lake) Stswecem’c/Xgat’tem (Canoe Creek) Lhtako (Red Bluff), Tl’esqox (Toosey), North Thompson Band, Tl’etinqox-t’in (Anaham), ?Esdilagh (Alexandria), Esketemc (Alkali) and Nazko First Nation. The following First Nations have Traditional Territory within the Chilcotin SRMP: Tsi Del Del (Alexis Creek), Tl’etinqox-t’in (Anaham), Yunesit’in (Stone), Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah), T’exelcemc (Williams Lake), Xat’sull/Cmetem (Soda Creek), Llenlleney’ten (High Bar), Esketemc (Alkali), Homalco, Laich-Kwil-Tach, and Nazko First Nation.

2.2.3 BC Treaty Process and Rights and Title Claims This section provides an overview of rights and title claims by First Nations in the RSA that overlap with components of the Project. As well, First Nations involved in the British Columbia Treaty Process and/or groups that have chosen to represent themselves will be described. Aboriginal rights are referred to in section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982, as follows: “The existing aboriginal and treaty rights of the aboriginal peoples of Canada are hereby recognized and affirmed.”

The British Columbia Treaty Process The British Columbia Treaty Process is a process of political negotiations between some First Nations communities, the Provincial Government and the Federal Government. Although the courts have recognized that aboriginal title exists in British Columbia, each First Nation must still prove their title in order to establish it. The purpose of the Treaty process is to reconcile crown title with aboriginal rights and title and to develop a new relationship amongst the three parties involved. Concerns addressed include the manner in which First Nations would participate in governance, economic development and natural resource management in British Columbia. The British Columbia Treaty process involves a six stage process which makes up the framework in which modern treaty negotiations in British Columbia take place. First Nations in the RSA involved in the British Columbia Treaty Process include the members of the NSTC and Esketemc (Alkali), who are independent. None of the seven

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-20 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Tsilhqot’in communities or Llenlleney’ten (High Bar) is currently part of the British Columbia Treaty Process.

2.2.3.1 Tsilhqot’in Nation Rights and Title Claim: The William Case

Introduction The genesis of the William case was the “Nemiah Trapline Action” commenced in 1990. This was followed by the “Brittany Trial Action” commenced in December, 1998. These claims evolved into the claims in the William case, (Figure 2-4). The William case was brought by Chief Roger William in his representative capacity as Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah) Chief on behalf of all Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah) and all Tsilhqot’in people. The plaintiff sought declarations of Tsilhqot’in aboriginal title in a part of the Cariboo- Chilcotin region of British Columbia defined as Tachelach’ed (“Brittany Triangle”) and the Trapline Territory. In addition, the plaintiff sought declarations of Tsilhqot’in aboriginal rights to hunt and trap in the Claim Area and a declaration of a Tsilhqot’in aboriginal right to trade in animal skins and pelts. The Claim Area consisted of 438,100 ha in the Chilcotin region of British Columbia. On November 20, 2007, Mr. Justice Vickers released his judgment. He concluded that aboriginal title could not be granted due to the all or nothing plea from the plaintiff. Mr. Justice Vickers found that the Tsilhqot’in people had aboriginal rights to hunt and trap birds and animals throughout the Claim area. Mr. Justice Vickers expressed his opinion that, had the lawsuit been pleaded differently then he probably would have found aboriginal title for the Tsilhqot’in people over almost half of the Claimed Area. All the parties filed notices of appeal from that judgment, but at the time of this application no further appeal steps appeared to be taken. It is quite unclear at this time whether the case will proceed to appeal, and if it does what may happen then is completely unknown. However, the court files are public documents and contain oral history information and numerous testimonies regarding the Tsilhqot’in Nation and traditional land use. In William (also known as Tsilhqot’in Nation vs. British Columbia) Mr. Justice Vickers expressed his opinion that the area where he would have been prepared to find aboriginal title was described as: • “The Tsilhqox (Chilko River) Corridor from its outlet at Tsilhqox Biny (Chilko Lake) including a corridor of at least 1 km on both sides of the river and inclusive of the river up to Gwetsilh (Siwash Bridge). • Xeni, inclusive of the entire north slope of Ts’il?os. This slope of Ts’il?os provides the southern boundary, while the eastern shore of Tsilhqox Biny marks the western boundary. Gweqez Dzelh and Xeni Dwelh combine to provide the northern boundary, while Tsiyi (Tsi ?Ezish Dzelh or Cardiff Mountain) marks the eastern boundary. • North from Xeni into Tachelach’ed to a line drawn east to west from the points where Elkin Creek joins the Dasiqox (Taseko Mines River) over to Nu Natase? on the Tsilhqox. Elkin Creek is that water course draining Nabi Tsi Biny (Elkin Lake), flowing northeast to the Dasiqox.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-21 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

• On the west, from Xeni across Tsilhqox Biny to Ch’a Biny and then over to the point on Talhiqox Biny (Tatlayoko Lake) where the Western Trapline boundary touches the lake at the southeast shore, then following the boundary of the Western Trapline so as to include Gwedzin Biny (Cochin Lake). • On the east from Xeni following the Dasiqox north to where it is joined by Elkin Creek. • With a northern boundary from Gwedzin Biny in a straight line to include the area north of Naghatalhchoz Biny (Big Eagle Lake or Chelquoit Lake) to Nu Natase?ex on the Tsilhqox where it joins the northern boundary of Tachelach’ed over to the Dasiqox at Elkin Creek” (2007: iii-iv). The aboriginal rights areas, and the area where Mr. Justice Vickers indicated that he would have been prepared to find aboriginal title if the facts were different as described above, are set out in the map prepared by Woodward and Company at Figure 2-4.

2.2.3.2 Northern Shuswap Tribal Society (“NSTS”) Treaty Negotiations Canada, British Columbia and the NSTS are currently engaged in treaty negotiations in the British Columbia Treaty Commission process. The NSTS represents more than 2000 people of Northern Secwepemc ancestry from the same four aboriginal communities in and around the Williams Lake area that comprise the NSTC (or NStQ), which are: T’exelcemc (Williams Lake), Xat’sull/Cmetem (Soda Creek), Stswecem’c/Xgat’tem (Canoe Creek), and Tsq’escen’ (Canim Lake) (INAC 2008). The NSTS officially declared its statement of intent on January 6, 1994 (NStQ 2006) and it’s Treaty Framework Agreement on December 10, 1997. The treaty negotiations include public consultation and internal review of documents jointly drafted by the three Parties. The NSTS is currently in Stage 4 of treaty negotiations. Since 2004, the NSTS has been in Stage 4 of treaty negotiations, which involves negotiating an agreement in principle. Members of the Xat’sull/Cmetem (Soda Creek) Treaty Team are currently seeking to address larger issues of the treaty, which include co-management of natural resources throughout the Traditional Territory; certainty of aboriginal title and rights; taxation; fiscal relations and revenue-sharing. The parties are meeting frequently, are working to deal with the more technical aspects of their negotiations and are awaiting an offer from the federal and provincial governments. Recent meetings held in May 2008, addressed the following chapters under negotiation: The Lands chapter, The Parks and Protected Area chapter, the Forest and Range chapter, the Access chapter, the Environmental Management chapter, and the Wildlife chapter. The NSTS has made significant progress over the past year. With agreement-in-principle negotiations scheduled for the near future, the parties are meeting more frequently and are making use of side tables and working groups to deal with the more technical aspects of their negotiations. Communication with their members continues to be a priority for the NSTS: their bi-monthly newspaper Lexey’em, along with monthly newsletters and community meetings, help keep members informed of the progress being made at the treaty table.

2.2.3.3 Esketemc (Alkali) Treaty Negotiations The Esketemc (Alkali) are currently in Stage 4 of treaty negotiations with Canada and British Columbia. The Esketemc (Alkali) entered treaty negotiations in 1993. They assert March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-22 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

that they are descendants of the Secwepemc (Shuswap) Tribe, that they have aboriginal title and rights to all land and water resources in their Traditional Territory, and that they have never surrendered, ceded or sold all or any of their aboriginal title or rights to the Federal or Provincial Crowns. The parties wish to negotiate a treaty that will provide clarity and certainty regarding governance and jurisdiction, ownership and use of lands and resources in the Traditional Territory (BC Treaty Commission 2007). The parties have maintained a negotiating schedule of approximately two days every six weeks over the past year. A main table meeting, the first for Esketemc (Alkali) in some time, took place in October 2006 at Alkali Lake. Three of the process-oriented chapters including Approval of the Agreement in Principle, Dispute Resolution and Implementation and Culture and Heritage were discussed. As of 2007, the Esketemc (Alkali) has eight chapters under negotiation which include: parks, forestry, land, subsurface resources, water, migratory birds, wildlife and local and regional government (INAC 2008). The Parties wish to negotiate a treaty that will provide clarity and certainty regarding governance and jurisdiction, ownership and use of lands and resources in the Territory (BC Treaty Commission 2007). The parties of the British Columbia Treaty Process hold main table meetings (where substantive negotiations take place in the presence of the main Chief Negotiators of all parties) every six weeks since October 2006.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-23 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Aboriginal Title and Rights Areas Tsilhqot'in Nation v. British Columbia, 2007 BCSC 1700.

1:126,675 0612

Kilometers G w Projection: Albers, NAD 83 Produced by: Clover Point Cartographics e Base Data: 1:20,000 TRIM Printed: November 21, 2007 tsilh

x o d q e h i l '' T @ h

Gwedzin Biny ac

ll x o q Nu Nata@e?ex i

y e s in B o^ a ch Nag hat al h D h

a a

i h

a T@i ?Ezish

T D^elh y i

n n e

Ch'a Biny X

i B T@'il?o@

D^elh

@ T

Legend

Tsilhqot'in Aboriginal Title Area Tsilhqot'in Aboriginal Rights Area

Section 2: First Nations

Figure 2-4 Aboriginal Title and Rights Areas—Tsilhqot’in Nation v. British Columbia, 2007 BCSC 1700

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-24 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

2.3 Overview of Existing Conditions by First Nation The following section is an overview of First Nation community demographics specifically looking at population, age, education, labour force, employment and unemployment and facilities and infrastructure.

2.3.1 Tsilhqot’in As noted earlier, the seven Tsilhqot’in communities of interest to this Project are Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah), ?Esdilagh (Alexandria), Tsi Del Del (Alexis Creek), Yunesit’in (Stone), Tl’etinqox-t’in Government Office (Anaham), Tl’esqox (Toosey), and Ulkatcho. The TNG is generally recognized as a tribal council representing four or five of the member communities, with Tl’etinqox-t’in (Anaham) being independent at the time of this report submission. The TNG does not represent either the Tl’esqox (Toosey) or the Ulkatcho communities, who are represented by the Carrier Chilcotin Tribal Council (CCTC), although it appears that the Tl’esqox (Toosey) may work closely with the TNG. Member communities are primarily located throughout the Chilcotin Plateau, west of the Fraser River, between Riske Creek (20 km west of Williams Lake) and the Coast Mountains, except the ?Esdilagh (Alexandria) which is north of Williams Lake on the east side of the Fraser River (British Columbia Government 2008).

2.3.1.1 Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah) The Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah) are located in the Nemiah Valley which is 150 km southwest of Williams Lake on Chilko Lake. The main community (most populous reserve) is at the Chilko Lake Reserve No. 1A on the east shore of Chilko Lake at the mouth of the Nemiah River. The Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah) has eight reserves on 1200 hectares of land (INAC 2008). The modern Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah) includes descendants from a number of bands and families that occupied lands around Tatla Lake and Chilko Lake (Alexander 1996). As of October 2008, the Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah) had a total registered population of 394 members. A total of 207 members resided on the Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah) reserve lands compared with 340 on reserve in 2001 (INAC 2008). Census statistics (INAC 2008) provides descriptions of the age, education and labour data for the community, but generally for a registered population that is less than that reported by Indian and Northern Affairs Canada due to a low participation rate. The following are census statistics.

Population The total registered population in 2001 was 165, compared to 175 in 1996. Total (registered and non-registered) population in 2001 was 170.

Age Of the 170 total population in 2001, there were 75 individuals under the age of 19 compared to 80 individuals out of 175 under the age of 19 in 1996. There were 95 individuals between the ages of 20 to 64 in 2001 and 85 in 1996, and no individuals were

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-25 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

over age 65 in 2001 census data compared to 10 over the age of 65 in 1996. The median age was 26.2 years in 2001 and 24.2 in 1996.

Education Of the 105 individuals 15 years or older in 2001, 15 individuals had a trades, college or university certificate or diploma below bachelor's degree compared with 10 in 1996. Twenty individuals had some post secondary education in 2001 compared with 25 in 1996. In both 2001 and 1996, there were 10 people with a high school graduation certificate as the highest level of schooling. In 2001, 55 individuals had less than a high school graduation certificate, compared with 70 out of 110 in 1996.

Labour Force Ranching and trapping is an important part of the local economy. Ranching employs about 50% of the local labour force. Ranching has deep roots in the community. Band members are also active in the area’s tourism economy guiding for tourist lodges, and selling arts and crafts. The community also operates a bed and breakfast, laundromat, café and gas station that derive income from the local tourism economy. As well, Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah) owns Xeni Gwet’in Enterprises which serves all local community infrastructure and is involved in road maintenance. The company owns a portable sawmill, three graders, two dump trucks, backhoe, bulldozer and excavator (Taseko 2007).

Employment and Unemployment The 2001 census data for employment and unemployment shows 52.4% of individuals over the age of 15 as being employed compared with 54.5% in 1996. The unemployment rate was 33.3% in 2001. Data is not available for 1996.

On-reserve Services, Facilities and Infrastructure According to data from the Socio-economic Impact Assessment (Taseko 2007), on- reserve services and facilities for the Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah) include: a community hall, a recreation centre, a band office located in Nemiah Valley, a school building and trailer, rodeo grounds, and a health centre. The Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah) also have high speed internet access available to residents and at the band office (Aboriginal Canada Portal 2008). The Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah) have year round access to a road that runs from the key populated reserve to the nearest regional service centre in Williams Lake (approximately 150 km southwest of the reserve).

2.3.1.2 Yunesit’in (Stone) The Yunesit’in (Stone) is located near Hanceville which is 90 km west of the City of Williams Lake. The main community (most populous reserve) is Stone No. 1 Reserve located 7 km west of Hanceville on the Chilcotin River. Yunesit’in (Stone) territory consists of five reserves on 2146.4 ha of land. The modern Yunesit’in (Stone) is comprised primarily of descendants from the pre-contact Stone Chilcotin (Alexander 1996). In 2008, the Yunesit’in (Stone) had a registered population of 397 members (INAC 2008). A total of 210 members resided on the Stone First Nation reserves compared with 264 in 2001 (INAC 2008).

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-26 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Census statistics (INAC 2008) provides descriptions of the age, education and labour data for the community, but generally for a registered population that is less than that reported by Indian and Northern Affairs Canada due to a low participation rate. The following are census statistics.

Population

The total registered population in 2001 was 235, compared to 205 in 1996. The total (registered and non-registered) population was 240 in 2001.

Age Of the 240 total population in 2001, there were 100 individuals under the age of 19 compared to 95 out of 225 individuals under the age of 19 in 1996. There were 120 individuals between the ages of 20 to 64 in 2001 and 110 between the ages of 20 to 64 in 1996. Fifteen individuals were over age 65 in 2001 and 15 in 1996. The median age in 2001 was 25.2 years 24.2 in 1996.

Education Of the 155 individuals 15 years or older in 2001, 15 people had some post secondary education compared with 25 in 1996, and 70 people with a trades, college or university certificate or diploma below bachelor's degree in 2001 compared with 15 in 1996. Ten people had a university degree at Bachelor of Arts (BA) level or higher in the 1996 census. Ten people had a high school graduation certificate in 2001 and 1996 as their highest level of education. In 2001, 65 individuals had less than a high school graduation certificate in 2001 compared with 105 out of 160 in 1996.

Labour Force Economic development activities include cattle ranching and forest-related activities (British Columbia First Nations 2006).

Employment and Unemployment In 2001, 35.5 individuals were employed, compared with 31.2 in 1996. The unemployment rate in 2001 was 42.1% compared with 33.3% in 1996.

On-reserve Services, Facilities and Infrastructure According to data from the Socio-economic Impact Assessment (Taseko 2007), on- reserve services and facilities for the Yunesit’in (Stone) include a community centre, a health centre, school buildings, two teacherages (housing for licensed educators), police detachment, a band office in Hanceville and a fire hall. In addition, on-reserve infrastructure includes heat, hydro and water, and garbage and sewer facilities. The band office has internet access and is also available for residents. The Yunesit’in (Stone) have year round access to a paved road that runs from the key populated reserve to the nearest regional service centre in Williams Lake which is approximately 165 km west of the reserve (INAC 2008).

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-27 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

2.3.1.3 Tsi Del Del (Alexis Creek) The Tsi Del Del (Alexis Creek) is located 110 km west of the City of Williams Lake on Highway 20. The main community is at Redstone Flat No. 1 on the Chilanko River, 20 km west of the junction with the Chilcotin River and 7 km south of Puntzi Lake. The Tsi Del Del (Alexis Creek) have 25 reserves encompassing 2610.7 ha. The modern Tsi Del Del (Alexis Creek) includes descendants from the pre-contact Chilcotin in the Puntzi and Chezacut Lake area, who then moved to the mouth of Alexis Creek, and eventually to Redstone Flats and Tatla Lake (Alexander 1996). Tsi Del Del’s tribal council affiliation is the TNG. In 2008, the Tsi Del Del (Alexis Creek) had a population of 623 registered members (INAC 2008). A total of 337 members resided on the Tsi Del Del (Alexis Creek) reserves compared with 292 in 2001 (INAC 2008). Census statistics (INAC 2008) provides descriptions of the age, education and labour data for the community, but generally for a registered population that is less than that reported by Indian and Northern Affairs Canada due to a low participation rate. The following are census statistics.

Population The total registered population in 2001 was 190, compared to 200 in 1996. The total (registered and non-registered) population in 2001 was 200.

Age Of the 200 total population in 2001, there were 65 individuals under the age of 19 compared to 85 individuals under the age of 19 in 1996. There were 105 individuals between the ages of 20 to 64 in 2001 and 1996, and 30 individuals were over age 65. The median age was 31.2 years.

Education Of the 150 individuals over the age of 15 in 2001, 15 individuals had some post secondary education in 2001 compared with 10 in 1996. Also in 2001, 10 people had a trades, college or university certificate or diploma (below bachelor's degree), and 10 people had a university degree at BA level or higher. Zero individuals reported having a high school certificate as their highest level of schooling in 2001, compared with 10 in 1996. Census data shows that 115 of the 150 individuals had less than a high school graduation certificate, compared with 110 out of 140 in 1996.

Labour Force Important economic development activities include logging and a gas station owned by Tsi Del Del (Alexis Creek). The Band owns Tsi Del Del Industries which is active in a number of areas, especially logging. The Band also owns a gas station and convenience store. Band members are active in area ranching and hunter-guiding, as well as traditional hunting and fishing activities (Taseko 2007).

Employment and Unemployment The 2001 census data for employment and unemployment shows 23.3% of individuals over the age of 15 as being employed and 46.7% as unemployed, compared with 33.3% as employed and 44.4% as unemployed in 1996.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-28 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

On-reserve Services, Facilities and Infrastructure According to data from the Socio-economic Impact Assessment (Taseko 2007), on- reserve services and facilities for Tsi Del Del (Alexis Creek) include: Alexis Creek Health Centre, a school, police detachment, recreation centre, a community hall, a fire hall, an Elder’s centre and a band office which is located in Chilanko Forks (British Columbia First Nations, 2006, and Aboriginal Portal Canada 2008). In addition on- reserve infrastructure includes heat, hydro, water, garbage and sewer facilities. Tsi Del Del (Alexis Creek) also has internet access available to residents and internet access at the band office (Aboriginal Canada Portal 2008). Tsi Del Del (Alexis Creek) has year round access to a paved road that runs from the key populated reserve to the nearest regional service centre in Williams Lake which is approximately 112 km west of the reserve.

2.3.1.4 Tl’etinqox-t’in (Anaham) Tl’etinqox-t’in (Anaham) is located 100 km west of the City of Williams Lake near Alexis Creek. The main community (most populous reserve) is at the Anaham Flat’s No. 1 on the banks of the Chilcotin River. The Tl’etinqox-t’in (Anaham) have 19 reserves on approximately 11,300 ha of land. The Tl’etinqox-t’in (Anaham) tribal council affiliation was the TNG, but at the time of the preparation of this report they appeared to be independent. In 2008, the Tl’etinqox-t’in (Anaham) had a total registered population of 1450 (INAC 2008). A total of 592 members current resided on the Tl’etinqox-t’in reserve lands compared to 667 in 2001 (INAC 2008). Census statistics (INAC 2008) provides descriptions of the age, education and labour data for the community, but generally for a registered population that is less than that reported by Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC 2008) due to a low participation rate. The following are census statistics.

Population The total registered population in 2001 was 390. No data is available for 1996. The total (registered and non-registered) population in 2001 was 395.

Age Of the 395 total population in 2001, there were 150 individuals under the age of 19. There were 220 individuals between the ages of 20 to 64 in 2001, and 25 individuals were over age 65. The median age was 27.3 years. Data for 1996 comparison was unavailable.

Education Of 280 individuals over the age of 15, census data from 2001 show that 40 people had a trades, college or university certificate or diploma (below bachelor's degree), and 10 people had a university degree at BA level or higher in 2001. In 2001, 15 individuals had some post secondary education and 10 individuals reported having a high school certificate as the highest level of schooling. Of the 280 individuals over the age of 15, 195 have less than a high school graduation certificate. Data for 1996 comparison was unavailable.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-29 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Labour Force Out of 280 individuals over the age of 15, 85 of the experienced labour force for the Tl’etinqox-t’in (Anaham) is in agriculture, or resource based (INAC 2008).

Employment and Unemployment In 2001, the employment rate for Tl’etinqox-t’in (Anaham) was 37.5% (INAC 2008). The unemployment rate in 2001 was 31 % based on a participation rate of 51.8 %. Data for 1996 comparison were unavailable.

On-reserve Services, Facilities and Infrastructure According to data from the Socio-economic Impact Assessment (Volume 6), on-reserve services and facilities for Tl’etinqox-t’in (Anaham) include: Anahim Lake Nursing Station located in Anahim Lake, a band administration office located in Alexis Creek, a school complex, three teacherages (housing units for licensed educators) a recreation centre and community hall, a Native law centre, a carpentry building, a fire hall, and a church. In addition, on-reserve infrastructure includes heat, hydro, water, garbage and sewer facilities. Tl’etinqox-t’in (Anaham) also has internet access available to residents and internet access at the band office (Aboriginal Canada Portal 2008). Tl’etinqox-t’in (Anaham) has year round access to a paved road that runs from the key populated reserve to the nearest regional service centre in Williams Lake which is approximately 100 km west of the reserve (INAC 2008).

2.3.1.5 ?Esdilagh (Alexandria) ?Esdilagh (Alexandria) is located near the town of Alexandria between the cities of Williams Lake and Quesnel. The main community is Alexandria Reserve No. 3 located on the banks of the Fraser River, 7 km south of the town of Alexandria. The reserve lands consist of a total of 14 individual reserves comprising 1304.1 ha. The modern ?Esdilagh (Alexandria) is a mixture of people which includes descendants from a number of pre- contact Anahim Lake Chilcotin bands, and some Secwepemc and Lhtakot’en Carrier bands (Alexander 1996). In 2008, the ?Esdilagh (Alexandria) had a total registered population of 174 people. A total of 49 members resided on the ?Esdilagh (Alexandria) main reserve compared to 60 in 2001 (INAC 2008). Census statistics (INAC 2008) provides descriptions of the age, education and labour data for the community, but was not available for ?Esdilagh (Alexandria).

2.3.1.6 Tl’esqox (Toosey) The Tl’esqox (Toosey) is recognized by the federal government as a member of the Carrier Chilcotin Tribal Council. The Tl’esqox (Toosey) is Tsilhqot’in but is not part of the TNG. However, the TNG works closely with the Tl’esqox (Toosey). The Carrier Chilcotin Tribal Council consists mainly of the Southern Carrier Nations and the Tsilhqot'in Nation (CCTC 2008).The modern Tl’esqox (Toosey) is comprised primarily of descendants from the pre-contact Anahim Lake Chilcotin (Alexander 1996).

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-30 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Tl’esqox (Toosey) is located about 40 km south of the City of Williams Lake. The Tl’esqox (Toosey) have four reserves on 2582.5 ha of land. In 2008, the Tl’esqox (Toosey) had a total registered population of 288 members (INAC 2008). A total of 148 members resided on Tl’esqox (Toosey) reserve lands compared to 171 in 2001 (INAC 2008). Census statistics (INAC 2008) provides descriptions of the age, education and labour data for the community, but generally for a registered population that is less than that reported by Indian and Northern Affairs Canada due to a low participation rate. The following are census statistics.

Population Census data shows the total registered population of 100 in 2001 and 75 in 1996. Total (registered and non-registered) population in 2001 was 105.

Age Of the 105 total population in 2001, the median age of the population was 25.8 years with 40 individuals under the age of 15 years, compared to 35 individuals out of 75 in 1996. There were 50 individuals between the ages of 20 and 64 in 2001 compared with 45 in 1996, and 0 individuals over the age of 65 in 2001 and 1996.

Education Of the 75 individuals over the age of 15 in 2001, 60 individuals had a trades, college or university certificate or diploma (below bachelor's degree) compared with 30 in 1996, and 25 individuals had with a university degree at BA level or higher in 2001 compared with 10 in 1996. Ten people had some post secondary education in 2001 compared with 25 individuals in 1996. No individuals held a high school graduation certificate as their highest level of education in 2001 and compared to 10 individuals in 1996. In 2001, there were 35 individuals out of the 75 over the age of 15 with less than a high school graduation certificate, compared with 25 out of 55 in 1996.

Labour Force Tl’esqox (Toosey) industry relies on agriculture, logging and the forestry industry (INAC 2008). Manufacturing and construction, health and education, wholesale retail and “other services” also make up the industry.

Employment and Unemployment The 2001 census data shows 26.7% of individuals over the age of 15 as being employed, compared with 54.5% in 1996, and 50% individuals unemployed in 2001, compared with 25% in 1996.

On-reserve Services, Facilities and Infrastructure According to data from the Socio-economic Impact Assessment (Taseko 2007), on- reserve services and facilities for the Tl’esqox (Toosey) include a community hall, a band administration office located in Riske Creek, a health centre, a fire hall and a machine shed. In addition, on-reserve infrastructure includes heat, hydro and water. Tl’esqox

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-31 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

(Toosey) also has internet access available to residents and internet access at the band office (Aboriginal Canada Portal 2008). Tl’esqox (Toosey) has year round access to a road that runs from the key populated reserve to the nearest regional service centre in Williams Lake which is approximately 64 km southwest of the reserve.

2.3.1.7 Ulkatcho The Ulkatcho is affiliated with the Carrier Chilcotin Tribal Council. Ulkatcho consists of 14 reserves, located on approximately 3245.7 ha of land (INAC 2008). The main community (most populous reserve) is at the Squinas Reserve No. 2 at the southeast end of Anahim Lake (INAC 2008). As of 1996, the registered population for Ulkatcho was 938 (INAC 2008). A total of 663 members resided on Ulkatcho reserve lands (INAC 2008). Census statistics (INAC 2008) provides descriptions of the age, education and labour data for the community, but generally for a registered population that is less than that reported by Indian and Northern Affairs Canada due to a low participation rate. The following are census statistics.

Population Census data is not available for 2001; however, the 1996 census data shows the total registered population of 240 and a total (registered and non-registered) population of 245.

Age Of the 245 total population in 1996, the median age of the population was 23.1 years with 105 individuals under the age of 15 years. There were 130 individuals between the ages of 20 and 64 in 1996 and ten individuals over the age of 65 in 1996.

Education Of the 170 individuals over the age of 15 in 1996, ten people had a trades, college or university certificate or diploma (below bachelor’s degree) and 10 people had some post secondary education. Twenty-five individuals held a high school graduation certificate in 1996 as their highest level of education. There were 125 individuals with less than a high school graduation certificate.

Employment and Unemployment The 1996 census data for employment and unemployment shows 29.4% of individuals over the age of 15 as being employed and 23.1% as unemployed.

On-reserve Services, Facilities and Infrastructure The Ulkatcho main reserve is located within 50 km of the nearest service centre to which it has year-round road access.

2.3.2 Secwepemc The five Secwepemc First Nations communities of interest to the Prosperity Project are: Xat'sull/Cmetem (Soda Creek), T'exelcemc (Williams Lake), Esketemc (Alkali),

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-32 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Stswecem'c/Xgat'tem (Canoe Creek), and Llenlleney’ten (High Bar). Three of the communities are represented by the NSTC with Esketemc and Llenlleney’ten being independent.

2.3.2.1 Stswecem'c /Xgat'tem (Canoe Creek) The Stswecem'c /Xgat'tem (Canoe Creek) is located in a semi remote area southwest of the city of Williams Lake on the east side of the Fraser River. Stswecem'c /Xgat'tem (Canoe Creek) consists of two communities, Dog Creek and Canoe Creek and is on 5880.4 ha of land. Each of the main communities of Dog Creek and Canoe Creek are situated on approximately 50 ha of land. In 2008 the Stswecem'c/Xgat'tem (Canoe Creek) had a total registered population of 687 (INAC 2008). A total of 242 members resided on the Stswecem'c/Xgat'tem (Canoe Creek) reserve lands compared to 337 in 2001 (INAC 2008). Census statistics (INAC 2008) provides descriptions of the age, education and labour data for the community, but generally for a registered population that is less than that reported by Indian and Northern Affairs Canada due to a low participation rate. The following are census statistics.

Population The total registered population in 2001 was 260 compared with 170 in 1996. Total (registered and non-registered) population was 265 in 2001.

Age Of the 265 total population in 2001, the median age of the population is 20.3 years with 130 individuals under the age of 15 years, compared to 85 in 1996 (Statistics Canada 2008). There were 125 individuals between the ages of 20 and 64 in 2001 compared with 80 in 1996, and 15 individuals over the age of 65 compared with 10 in 1996.

Education Of the 175 persons over the age of 15 in 2001, 35 people had a trade, a college or university certificate or diploma below the bachelor’s degree level, compared with 10 people in 1996. In 2001, 30 people reported some post secondary education, compared with 20 people in 1996. Ten people had a high school graduation certificate as their highest level of education, compared with 15 in 1996. In 2001, there were 105 people with less than a high school graduation certificate, compared with 65 in 1996.

Labour Force Because of the remoteness, many members must travel for work and there is a shortage of work opportunities locally. However, several Band members operate successful business ventures in a variety of areas including: cabinet making, silviculture, vegetable farming, small sawmill operation, electrical wiring, beef cattle operation, hay production, food catering and bakery (Taseko 2007).

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-33 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Employment and Unemployment In 2001, the employment rate for Stswecem'c/Xgat'tem (Canoe Creek) was 41.7 % compared with 33.3% in 1996. The unemployment rate in 2001 was 25%, compared with 46.2% in 1996.

On-reserve Services, Facilities and Infrastructure According to data from the Socio-economic Impact Assessment (Volume 6), on-reserve services and facilities for the Stswecem'c/Xgat'tem (Canoe Creek) include a band administration office at Dog Creek, a health centre, a one room school house, a fire hall, gymnasium/community centre, an outdoor ice rink, and a log crafted church split between two reserves (Canoe Creek and Dog Creek) (British Columbia First Nations 2006, Aboriginal Canada Portal 2008). In addition, on-reserve infrastructure includes heat, hydro, water, garbage and sewer facilities. The band office has internet access and is also available for residents. Stswecem'c/Xgat'tem (Canoe Creek) has year round access to a road that runs from the reserve to the nearest regional service centre in Williams Lake and 100 Mile House.

2.3.2.2 T'exelcemc (Williams Lake) The T’exelcemc (Williams Lake).Their main reserve is located about 12 km south of the City of Williams Lake at Sugarcane, just off of Highway 97. The T'exelcemc (Williams Lake) lands consist of eight reserves on 1927.3 ha. In 2008, the Williams Lake First Nation had a total registered population of 555 members with a total of 212 members residing on Williams Lake First Nation reserve lands (INAC 2008). In 2001, 210 registered members resided on reserve lands. Census statistics (INAC 2008) provides descriptions of the age, education and labour data for the community, but generally for a registered population that is less than that reported by Indian and Northern Affairs Canada due to a low participation rate. The following are census statistics.

Population The total registered population in 2001 was 255 compared to 120 in 1996. Total (registered and non-registered) population in 2001 was 275.

Age Of the 275 total population in 2001, the median age of the population was 28.3 years with 95 individuals under the age of 15 years, compared to 35 individuals out of 130 in 1996. There were 170 individuals between the ages of 20 and 64 in 2001 compared with 80 in 1996, and 10 individuals over the age of 65 in 2001 and 1996.

Education Of the 210 individuals over the age of 15 in 2001, forty-five had a trades, college or university certificate or diploma (below bachelor's degree) in 2001 compared with 10 in 1996, and 10 individuals had with a university degree at BA level or higher in 2001 and 1996 census data. Sixty people had some post secondary education in 2001, compared with 10 in 1996. Fifteen individuals held a high school graduation certificate as their

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-34 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

highest level of education in 2001 and 1996. In 2001, there were 75 individuals with less than a high school graduation certificate, compared with 65 out of 105 in 1996.

Labour Force Economic development activities rely primarily on the manufacturing and construction industry, and agricultural, health and education related activities.

Employment and Unemployment Census data from 2001 shows the employment rate at 51.2% and unemployment rate at 26.7%.

On-reserve Services, Facilities and Infrastructure According to data from Aboriginal Canada Portal (2008) on-reserve services and facilities for T’exelcemc (Williams Lake) include a band administration office, a health centre, a recreation centre and a fire hall. In addition, on-reserve infrastructure includes heat, hydro and water. The band office also has internet access.

2.3.2.3 Xat’sull/Cmetem (Soda Creek) The Xat’sull/Cmetem (Soda Creek) is located north of the City of Williams Lake on Highway 97. Xat’sull/Cmetem (Soda Creek) consists of two reserves on approximately 2048 ha. The two reserves are at Deep Creek, 30 km north of Williams Lake and Soda Creek, 45 km north of Williams Lake. Both reserves are located on Highway 97. The Xat’sull/Cmetem (Soda Creek) was once nearly half Carrier but is now primarily a Secwepemc band (Haagen 2008). Xat’sull/Cmetem (Soda Creek) is a member of the Great Secwepemc Nation, once known as the people of Xat'sull. Xat'sull/Cmetem (Soda Creek) is the northernmost Secwepemc tribe of the Secwepemc Nation, which is the largest Nation within the interior of British Columbia. Xat’sull/Cmetem (Soda Creek) is one of four Northern Secwepemc Nation Bands making up the NSTC. Xat’sull/Cmetem (Soda Creek) was originally a combination of two groups of Secwepemc peoples—Soda Creek and Deep Creek. In 2008 the Xat’sull/Cmetem (Soda Creek) had a total registered population of 359 (INAC 2008). A total of 150 members resided on the Xat’sull/Cmetem (Soda Creek) reserve lands compared to 203 in 2001 (INAC 2008). Census statistics (INAC 2008) provides descriptions of the age, education and labour data for the community, but generally for a registered population that is less than that reported by Indian and Northern Affairs Canada due to a low participation rate. The following are census statistics.

Population Census data shows the total registered population of 165 in 2001 and 150 in 1996. Total (registered and non-registered) population in 2001 was 175.

Age Of the 175 total population in 2001, the median age of the population was 30.4 years with 65 individuals under the age of 15 years, compared to 65 individuals out of 175 in 1996 March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-35 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

(INAC 2008). There were 110 individuals between the ages of 20 and 64 in 2001 compared with 95 in 1996, and 0 individuals over the age of 65 in 2001 and 1996.

Education Of the 130 individuals over the age of 15 in 2001, 35 had a trade, college or university certificate or diploma (below bachelor's degree) compared with 15 in 1996, and ten individuals had with a university degree at BA level or higher in 2001 compared with zero in 1996 census data. Sixty people had some post secondary education in 2001, compared with zero in 1996. Ten individuals held a high school graduation certificate as their highest level of education in both 2001 and 1996 census data. In 2001, there were 55 individuals with less than a high school graduation certificate of the 130 individuals over the age of 15, compared with 50 out of 120 in 1996.

Labour Force Economic development activities rely primarily on the manufacturing and construction industry, and agricultural, health and education related activities. Xat’sull/Cmetem (Soda Creek) currently operates two social enterprises, Xat’sull Heritage Village and Whispering Willows Campsite (Xat’sull/Cmetem 2008).

Employment and Unemployment In 2001, the employment rate for Xat’sull/Cmetem (Soda Creek) Soda Creek was 55.6% compared with 45.8% in 1996. The unemployment rate in 2001 was 21.1%, compared with 35.3% in 1996.

2.3.2.4 Esketemc (Alkali) The Esketemc (Alkali) Traditional Territory spans the Alkali Lake area, which is southwest of the City of Williams Lake. The Esketemc (Alkali) hold 19 reserves on 3960.1 ha. The main community (most populous reserve) is Alkali Lake No. 1, at the Lillooet District at Alkali Lake (INAC 2008). Esketemc (Alkali) is a First Nations government of the Secwepemc people but is not a member of the NSTC or the Shuswap Nation Tribal Council, and has no tribal council affiliation. In 2008, the Esketemc (Alkali) had a population of 762 members (INAC 2008). A total of 403 members resided on Esketemc (Alkali) reserve lands compared to 427 in 2001 (INAC 2008). Census statistics (INAC 2008) provides descriptions of the age, education and labour data for the community, but generally for a registered population that is less than that reported by Indian and Northern Affairs Canada due to a low participation rate. The following are census statistics.

Population Census data shows the total registered population of 440 in 2001 and 390 in 1996. Total (registered and non-registered) population in 2001 was 455.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-36 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Age Of the 455 total population in 2001, the median age of the population was 26.2 years with 185 individuals under the age of 15 years, compared to 170 individuals out of 405 in 1996. There were 245 individuals between the ages of 20 and 64 in2001 compared with 220 in 1996, and 30 individuals over the age of 65 in 2001 and 20 in 1996.

Education Of the 320 individuals over the age of 15 in 2001, 60 had a trades, college or university certificate or diploma (below bachelor's degree) compared with 30 in 1996, and ten individuals had with a university degree at BA level or higher in 2001 compared with zero in 1996 census data. Seventy people had some post secondary education in both 2001 and in 1996. Thirty individuals held a high school graduation certificate as their highest level of education in both 2001 and 1996. In 2001, there were 155 individuals with less than a high school graduation certificate of the 320 individuals over the age of 15, compared with 130 out of 270 in 1996.

Labour Force The Esketemc (Alkali) industry relies on agriculture, logging and the forestry industry (Taseko 2007; INAC 2008). Manufacturing and construction, health and education, wholesale retail and “other services” also make up the industry.

Employment and Unemployment The 2001 census data for employment and unemployment shows 37.5% of individuals over the age of 15 as being employed, compared with 51.9 in 1996, and 35.9% as unemployed in 2001, compared with 15.6% in 1996.

On-reserve Services, Facilities and Infrastructure According to data Aboriginal Canada Portal (2008), on-reserve services and facilities for The Esketemc (Alkali) include: a band administration office, a recreation centre, the Esketemc Health Centre, a school, police detachment and fire hall. In addition, on-reserve infrastructure includes heat, hydro, water, garbage and sewer facilities. The Esketemc (Alkali) Band Office also has internet access available to residents and internet access at the band office (Aboriginal Canada Portal 2008). Esketemc (Alkali) is located between 50 and 350 km from the nearest service centre to which it has year-round road access.

2.3.2.5 Llenlleney’ten (High Bar) Llenlleney’ten (High Bar) Traditional Territory spans the Alkali Lake area, which is southwest of the City of Williams Lake. Llenlleney’ten (High Bar) holds three reserves on 1546.3 ha. The main community (most populous reserve) is High Bar No. 1, located in the Lillooet District on the Fraser River, 17 km northwest of Kelly Lake. The total registered population in 2008 is 72. All individuals are registered as living off-reserve (INAC 2008). Census statistics (INAC 2008) provides descriptions of the age, education and labour data for the community, but was not available for Llenlleney’ten (High Bar).

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-37 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

2.4 Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Land Use The following section provides a review on current and historical use of traditional lands within the RSA.

2.4.1 Introduction to Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Land Use This section provides a definition of Traditional Knowledge, a description of the methodology used to collect Traditional Knowledge for this study and an overview of the Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Land Use of each community.

2.4.1.1 Definitions and Discussion of Traditional Knowledge The Canadian Environmental Assessment Office (CEAA) defines Traditional Knowledge as (http://www.ceaa-acee.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=En&n=4A795E76-1): “a body of knowledge built up by a group of people through generations of living in close contact with nature. Aboriginal Traditional Knowledge is cumulative and dynamic. It builds upon the historic experiences of a people and adapts to social, economic, environmental, spiritual and political change.” Section 16.1 of the recently amended CEAA, gives responsible authorities conducting an EA the discretion to consider Aboriginal traditional knowledge in any EA. The approved EIS Guidelines for the Prosperity Project state in part that “the federal review panel will promote and facilitate the contribution of traditional knowledge to the review process. The review panel will consider the views of communities and traditional knowledge holders during the review process and determine which information should be kept confidential. The proponent must incorporate into the EIS the local knowledge to which it has access or that it may reasonably be expected to acquire through appropriate due diligence, in keeping with appropriate ethical standards and without breaching obligations of confidentiality.” The EIS Guidelines also state that “The EIS will describe where and how Traditional Ecological Knowledge is incorporated into the assessment, including its effects on predicting impacts and determining mitigation measures. Where traditional knowledge is not available or not provided in a timely manner the EIS will describe efforts taken to obtain it.” The BC EAO defines Traditional Knowledge as (BCEAO 2006): “a body of knowledge built up over time, mainly through oral history, and continuing into the present, which is held by people living in close contact with the natural environment. It includes an understanding of plants and animals, the functioning and management of ecosystems, and may entail knowledge of uses of certain species of flora and/or fauna for food, medicines, fuel or shelter. It may provide valuable insights into the conservation, management and sustainability of biological diversity.” According to the British Columbia Supplementary Guide to First Nations: The British Columbia Environmental Assessment Process (2003): March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-38 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

“First Nations may be asked to provide information on a range of issues, including Traditional Knowledge (sometimes referred to as Traditional Ecological Knowledge) and information about asserted current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes.”

2.4.2 Methodology Over the course of the past three years Taseko worked to engage First Nation communities in Traditional Knowledge Studies that would comprehensively address current and historical use of traditional lands. In December 2006 consultants retained by Taseko Mines Ltd. made a presentation to TNG leadership to explain how they proposed to conduct the socio-economic component of the EIS. Subsequent to that meeting TNG made a determination that they should conduct an independent Community Impact Assessment (CIA) on behalf of Tsilhqot’in and that a Tsilhqot’in Traditional Land Use Impact Study should be included as a component of the CIA. A concept paper describing an approach for the conduct of a CIA was prepared and Taseko committed to fund Phase one of the CIA. Unfortunately, the study was halted by the TNG leadership early during the scoping phase. Efforts were made by Taseko to initiate Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Use studies in the latter part of 2007 and spring of 2008 with Esketemc (Alkali), Stswecem’c/ Xgat’tem (Canoe Creek), and T’exelcemc (Williams Lake). Unfortunately, due to a combination of changes in community leadership at the time of these discussions and difficulty in determining an economically feasible study scope, no TUS for any Secwepemc First Nations was initiated. It is not an official requirement of the BCEAO to include Traditional Knowledge in an EA; however, Taseko values and respects First Nations Traditional Knowledge and sought to incorporate this knowledge in the EA process. Traditional Knowledge was gathered from three primary sources: • William (Tsilhqot’in Nation) case documents (Tsilhqot’in Nation) • the Heritage Significance of the Fish Lake Study Area: Ethnography (Xeni Gwet’in [Nemiah] and Yunesit’in [Stone] and An Overview of the Heritage Significance of the Proposed Power and Transportation Corridors Servicing the Fish Lake Project (Stswecem’c [Canoe Creek/Dog Creek], Esketemc [Alkali Lake], and Yunesit’in [Stone]) • existing sources review Each of these sources is discussed in further detail in the following sections.

2.4.2.1 William (“Tsilhqot’in Nation”) Case Decision The case documents of William (Tsilhqot’in Nation vs. British Columbia), 2007 BCSC 1700, (Government of British Columbia 2007a) including the appendices, maps, and case testimonies were reviewed for relevant Traditional Knowledge information within the LSA. As previously mentioned, the judgment in this case has been appealed and remains unresolved. At this time; however, the case files are public documents and contain oral history information and numerous testimonies regarding the Tsilhqot’in Nation and Traditional Land Use.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-39 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

2.4.2.2 Heritage Significance Study of the Fish Lake Study Area: Ethnography Taseko commissioned a Traditional Knowledge study in 1993 entitled An Overview of the Heritage Significance of the Proposed Power and Transportation Corridors Servicing the Fish Lake Project (Ehrhart-English). This study provides a comprehensive assessment of the historical and traditional land use of the Stswecem’c/Xgat’tem (Canoe Creek), Esketemc (Alkali), and Yunesit’in (Stone) along the proposed power and transportation corridor. The methodology included interviews with elders and key informants from each of the communities. Taseko commissioned a second Traditional Knowledge study in 1994 entitled The Heritage Significance of the Fish Lake Study Area: Ethnography (Ehrhart-English). This comprehensive study examined historical and current traditional land use in the RSA, and is the primary basis for understanding the history of the TNG. The study was conducted in July and August of 1993 wherein all community members over the age of 15 were asked to participate in an interview. The interview methodology was designed with Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah) members to ensure appropriateness for Tsilhqot’in culture. In total, 58 members of the Xeni Gwet’in community were interviewed and three members from the Yunesit’in (Stone) were interviewed. Efforts were made to interview more members of the Yunesit’in (Stone); however, members were not available. In total, over two hundred hours of interviews were conducted on all aspects of the individual’s lives and land use in Fish and Little Fish lakes area.

2.4.2.3 Existing Sources Review An existing sources review was conducted on each of the First Nations. For the Tsilhqot’in people the review included: • Alexander, Diana, 1997. A Cultural Heritage Overview of the Cariboo Forest Region • Alexander, Diana, 1996. A Cultural Heritage Overview of the Western Half of the Williams Lake Forest District • Farrand, Livingston, 1900. Traditions of the Chilcotin Indians. Memoirs of the American Museum of Natural History • Friends of the Nemiah Valley Website, 2008 • Glavin, Terry and the People of the Nemiah Valley, 1992. Nemiah The Conquered Country • Lane, Robert, 1981 Chilcotin • Littlemore, Richard, 2000. Nemiah: Home of the Xeni Gwet’in Pacific Salmon Forests Project • Matson, R.G. and Magne, Martin, 2007. Athapaskan Migrations: The Archaeology of Eagle Lake, British Columbia • Rothenburger, Mel, 1978. The Chilcotin War • Tsilhqot’in National Government Website, 2008 • Tsi Del Del Website, 2008 • Unknown Author, 2008. We do not know his name: Klatassen and the Chilcotin War website March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-40 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

• Xeni Gwet’in: People of Nemiah Website, 2008 Two frequently cited sources on the Tsilhqot’in people include: • Lane, Robert, 1953. Cultural Relations of the Chilcotin of West Central British Columbia. Unpublished Ph.D. • Tyhurst, Robert, 1984. The Chilcotin: An Ethnographic History. Unpublished M.A. These documents were not obtainable for this review, however, are included as sources in the work of Alexander (1996), Ehrhart-English (1994), Matson and Magne (2007), and in the case of Tsilhqot’in Nation vs. British Columbia (Government of British Columbia 2007a). A final source that was not obtainable in this review was the letters and memoirs of James Teit from 1895–1930. Teit was the first anthropologist to make notes on the Tsilhqot’in people, however, the majority of his observations are from time spent with other First Nation bands, and his only concentrated contact with the Tsilhqot’in was over a two week period (Matson and Magne 2007). For the Secwepemc people the review included: • Alexander, Diana, 1997. A Cultural Heritage Overview of the Cariboo Forest Region • Alexander, Diana, 1996. A Cultural Heritage Overview of the Western Half of The Williams Lake Forest District • Bouchard, Randy and Kennedy, Dorothy, 1979. Shuswap Stories • Brow, James, 1972. Shuswap of Canada • Dawson, George, 1891. Notes on the Shuswap People of British Columbia • Ignace, Marianne Boelscher, 1998. Shuswap • Jack, Rita; Matthew, Marie; and, Matthew, Robert, 1993. Shuswap Community Handbook • Palmer, Andie, 2005. Maps of Experience: The Anchoring of Land to Story in Secwepemc Discourse • Secwepemc Cultural Education Society and Simon Fraser University, 1999. Re tsuwet.s re Secwepemc: The Things We Do • Wolf, Annabel Cropped Eared and Matthew, Robert, 1996. Shuswap History: A Century of Change

2.4.3 Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Land Use for the Tsilhqot’in People This section will describe the Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Land Use of the Tsilhqot’in people both historically and currently.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-41 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

2.4.3.1 Traditional Land Use Overview Tsilhqot’in Traditional Land Use was historically based on subsistence activities that were determined by the seasons. Alexander (1997) notes that four critical environmental factors influenced Traditional Land Use patterns: 1. “increasingly colder weather and heavier snow falls as one moves up and away from the Fraser River 2. progressively smaller and later salmon runs as one moves up the Fraser River drainage system 3. fewer montane localities and more lakes in northern portions of the study area (western half of the Williams Lake Forest District) 4. less open environments as one moves up and away from the Fraser River” The Tsilhqot’in calendar is based on five seasons: Xi (Winter) lasted from December to March, Eghulthts’en (Spring) lasted from April to May, Early Dan (Summer) spans from June to mid-July, late Dan (Summer) spans from July to September and Dan chi’iz (Fall) spans from September to November. Table 2-2 illustrates the residential groups and seasonal movements of the Tsilhqot’in. The winter settlement consisted of a maximum of two to three families in any single location (Lane 1981; Matson and Magne 2007). Larger groupings came together for the spring fish spawn, in late July and August for harvesting, and throughout the fall at salmon fishing sites (Lane 1981; Matson and Magne 2007). As of Lane’s work in 1981 gatherings still occurred at fishing camps at Henry’s Crossing and at Siwash Canyon along the Chilko River (Matson and Magne 2007). Tsilhqot’in Traditional Land Use was historically based on sustainability. In times of abundance, such as early summer, hunting was conducted by selection taking available game according to sex (males) and distribution (Tsilhqot’in Nation vs. British Columbia, Appendix 3, [Government of British Columbia 2007a]). Harvesting was conducted selectively by taking the larger roots, plant stems were disseminated and selective areas were burned from time to time (Alexander 1997). A strong division of labour was established between men and women in the pre-contact era (Ignace 1998). Women gathered and processed plant foods and fibers, and processed fish, meat, and skins (Matson and Magne 2007; Ignace 1998). Men were responsible for the collection of the fish and meat (Matson and Magne 2007; Ignace 1998). In 1887 three Tsilhqot’in reserves were established known today as Anaham, Toosey, and Stone reserves. In 1909, Tsi Del Del (Alexis Creek) and Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah) reserves were established. The implementation of the reserves led to changes in traditional land use as the Tsilhqot’in began to shift from solely a traditional economy to a mix of ranching and traditional subsistence (Matson and Magne 2007).

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-42 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Table 2-2 Tsilhqot’in Residential Groups and Seasonal Movements (Tsilhqot’in Nation vs. British Columbia Appendix 3 [Government of British Columbia 2007a]; Alexander 1997) Season & Months Group Sustenance and Activities Winter Encampment Wintering at lake with abundant fishery and fuel. Reliance November–February on dried meat, fish and berries, supplemented with ice- fishing and limited hunting Late Winter Family Stored food depleted or exhausted. Families disperse February–March from winter camp to search for game, ice fishing on lakes, collecting roots and new plants Spring Band Spring runoff. Fishing in spawning streams for lake fish. April–May Muskrat and other trapping. Some plant foods. Traps set for migratory game Late Spring–Early Encampment As the land dried, hunting intensified. Men hunted along Summer game trails; women fished May–June Summer Encampment Movement into mountains; marmot trapping, root digging, July–September berrying, caribou hunting. When salmon arrive, move to fishing sits on Chilko. Chilcotin and other salmon rivers Fall Family Dispersal to mountains for marmots, caribou to lakes for Late September - Chilcotin sockeye salmon and kokanee and preparation of October game fences. Hunting big game migrating down form mountains. At end of season, move to wintering sites on lakes and rivers NOTE: * Based on Lane 1953: 172-173; 1981:405-406

Around 1880, ranches were being established in the Chilcotin valley, and the males participated actively in this lifestyle into the mid-twentieth century. As ranches developed, haying became important and Tsilhqot’in families often took on this chore until the 1950s when this became a mechanized activity (Alexander 1997; Lane 1981). In the 1960s, the Chilcotin area became popular with hunters, fishermen, home seekers and ranchers (Alexander 1997; Lane 1981). Subsistence and economic activities were largely carried out on the public lands that the Tsilhqot’in assumed were available to them by right (Alexander 1997). Continued development in the 1950s and 1960s led to a decrease in the resources that the Tsilhqot’in depended upon and to a decline in the economic opportunities available to them (Lane 1981). In 1973 a road was built into the Nemiah Valley, which has significantly impacted traditional land use, culture, and the way of life for the Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah) (Glavin 1992). Prior to the completion of the road, life for the Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah) continued as it had for essentially the past 100 years. The community members ran cattle and trapped through the winter, and harvested vegetation, hunted, and fished in the summer months (Littlemore 2000). Once a year community members would load their horse and wagons and make the trip to Williams Lake to sell cattle and buy seeds and dry goods for coming year (Littlemore 2000). The trip took one week each way. Now, most people have vehicles and travel to and from Williams Lake once a week (Littlemore 2000). People focus less on intensive subsistence livelihoods, as there is now the option of the supermarket in town. Prior to 1973, 90% of community members were fluent speakers of

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-43 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

the Tsilhqot’in language, making the Tsilhqot’in language the most preserved in British Columbia (Littlemore 2000). Today, less than half of the under 20 year olds speak the language (Littlemore 2000). The road has impacted the culture of the Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah) community and the traditional land use patterns as subsistence livelihoods are no longer a matter of survival. In addition, the road has led to increased accessed into the area for industry, primarily logging. In 1989 the Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah) issued a declaration, establishing the Nemiah Aboriginal Wilderness Preserve which declares how the Nemiah want their traditional lands to be used (Littlemore 2000). The Nemiah Aboriginal Wilderness Preserve is the area of the Brittany Triangle bounded by the south by the Nemiah Valley, on the west by Chilko River and to the east by Taseko River. The declaration of the Nemiah Aboriginal Wilderness Preserve is as follows (Friends of the Nemiah Valley 2008): “Let it be known that: Within the Nemiah Aboriginal Wilderness Preserve: • There shall be no commercial logging. Only local cutting of trees for our own needs (i.e., firewood, housing, fencing, native uses, etc.). • There shall be no mining or mining explorations. • There shall be no commercial road building. • All terrain vehicles and skidoos shall only be permitted for trapping purposes. • There shall be no flooding or dam construction on Chilko, Taseko and Tatlayoko Lakes. • This is the spiritual and economic homeland of our people. We will continue in perpetuity: • to have and exercise our traditional rights of hunting, fishing, trapping, gathering, and natural resources • to carry on our traditional ranching way of life • to practice our traditional native medicine, religion, sacred and spiritual ways • That we are prepared to SHARE our Nemiah Aboriginal Wilderness Preserve with non-natives in the following ways: • with our permission visitors may come and view and photograph our beautiful land • we will issue permits, subject to our conservation rules, for hunting and fishing within our Preserve • the respectful use of our Preserve by canoeists, hikers, light campers and other visitors is encouraged subject to our system of permits • We are prepared to enforce and defend our Aboriginal rights in any way we are able.”

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-44 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

The traditional land use of the Tsilhqot’in people has changed since pre-contact times with the establishment of reserves and the adoption of ranching, the building of a road into the Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah) community, and the increasing levels of industry activity impacting all Tsilhqot’in people. Throughout these changes, the Tsilhqot’in have maintained many forms of Traditional Land Use activities within their traditional territory.

2.4.3.2 The Fish Lake Study Area In the Tsilhqot’in language Fish Lake is referred to as Teztan Biny (also known as Teztan Biny), Little Fish Lake as Y’anah Biny, and the general area between Fish Lake and Little Fish Lake as Nabas. Figure 2-5 shows the Tsilhqot’in place names for the region.

Figure 2-5 Tsilhqot’in Place Names in the Regional Study Area

In Tsilhqot’in Nation vs. British Columbia Appendix 2 (Government of British Columbia 2007a): Select Tsilhqot’in Villages, Dwellings and Burial Grounds in the Claim Area Article 177 under the section of Nabas under the heading The Eastern Trapline states: “Nabas, place name #95, is a significant site of continuous Tsilhqot’in occupation from the time before sovereignty to the present era. There are cabins and campsites at Nabas. There are cabins at Nabas where

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-45 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Tsilhqot’in people lived until recently. Tsilhqot’in people are buried there.” Article 175 of the heading Teztan also states: “In the 20th century this has been an important fishing and hunting camp for the Tsilhqot’in people, and there have been Xeni Gwet’in gatherings there in recent years”. Ehrhart-English (1994) further provides explanation of the traditional land use of the Fish Lake and Little Fish Lake area. Ethnographic records demonstrate that historical settlement at Little Fish Lake dates back to the 1920s, although some records state that the area has been used since 1860 or earlier (Ehrhart-English 1994). Jimmy William and his family settled in Little Fish Lake in the 1920’s where Seymour and Elizabeth Seymour from Stone, John and Midi Baptiste from Nemiah, and Buffalo and Madeline Hance from Anaham lived. The William family were the only settlers that permanently remained in the area after the Seymour family died shortly after. The William family lived in the settlement for several decades, raising herds which reached as many as 200 head of cattle and 15 horses. In the summer the William family harvested hay for the cattle and horses to last through the winter, and supplemented their income through local trapping. For subsistence the family ice fished at Fish Lake in the winter, and gathered provisions throughout the summer. The William family created numerous trails and wagon roads, which served to increase access to the area for the people from Nemiah and Stone. By the early 1930s, trapping and ranching had become established methods of earning income. The land use in the area shifted from a traditional economy to a cash economy where people could earn their living with fish and game, but supplement that living and buy trade goods. This resulted in the land use in the area to shift from a mixed use of resources, including traditional subsistence activities, to those activities that provided cash income (Ehrhart-English 1994). In 1971 Jimmy William died and his family took over his land. One summer the weather conditions did not allow enough feed to sustain the cattle and horses over the winter and the range was sold to Henry Solomon. After the William family left the area, continuous habitation at Little Fish Lake ceased.

Traditional Land Use Sites The area is of significant historical value to local people. The William family and others who have heavily used the Little Fish Lake area have a strong spiritual attachment to specific locations, such as areas where cabins have provided a home base for the cultural and economic lifestyle. Traditional Land Use sites include cabins and camp sites, burial sites, trails, culturally modified trees, hunting sites, gathering sites, fishing sites and other geographical locations that are of particular importance for cultural, historic or spiritual reasons. The settlement at Little Fish Lake has buildings that were remaining in 1993. Figure 2-6 illustrates a photo that accompanies the following description: “Jimmy built the corral to winter his horses (A) and the larger corral (G) for cattle. This corral (G) extends into the water of Little Fish Lake for watering cattle. Cabin F has no roof and was used for hay. Cabin B is the cabin built by William Setah and Jimmy. Cabin C was built by Jimmy and old Seymour for a storage shed. Cabin D was Seymour’s cabin that

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-46 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

was later turned into a storage shed. It is the oldest structure there. Cabin E was built by John Baptiste. The exact year is not known but it was probably built in the 1930s for trapping” (Ehrhart-English 1994).

Figure 2-6 Photograph of the Settlement at Little Fish Lake

According to the Ehrhart-English (Ehrhart-English 1994; p. 49) report, spiritual significance is a measure of the depth of emotion people feel for an area, and, such areas are present in the Little Fish Lake area. One potential burial sites has been reported and is referred to in the Archaeological Impact Assessment conducted by Terra Archaeology Consultants on behalf of Taseko (Volume 9, Section 2). (Ehrhart-English 1994) discussed the significance of the area to the Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah) for hunting, trapping, gathering and fishing. Cabins represent ties to the past and the land, and this area is considered home to certain families of the Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah). The amount of activity in the area seems to be related to who was living in the area, which was largely dependent on the presence of game or fish at that time. The Little Fish Lake area has been used heavily by individuals at the cabin sites. The other areas in the mine development zone are used for hunting, trapping, or fishing mostly by the Solomon and William families (Ehrhart-English 1994). Hunting and trapping are traditional activities that are historically and integrally a part of the Tsilhqot’in culture. In Ehrhart-English (1993) an important fish camp was identified at Kloakut Lake that has been used by the Stone people for generations. This site was identified by the Stone people as being of importance to the community.

Traditional Knowledge The following section will describe the Traditional Knowledge of the Tsilhqot’in. The section is divided into the three sections of wildlife, fish, and vegetation. Each section depicts resources that are a part of Tsilhqot’in traditional livelihoods and how these resources were (and are) utilized.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-47 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Wildlife Wildlife hunted by the Tsilhqot’in in the Fish Lake study area as defined in Ehrhart- English’s study (1994) (Appendix 8-2-B), Lane (1981), and Alexander (1997) include: • mountain goats • mule deer • marmots/groundhogs • moose (post European contact) Wildlife trapped by the Tsilhqot’in in the Fish Lake study area as defined in Ehrhart- English’s study (1994) (Appendix 8-2-B), Lane (1981), and Alexander (1997) include: • beaver • grouse • bobcat • muskrat • cougar • rabbits/hare • coyote • squirrel • fisher • weasel • geese/ducks • wolverine Additional wildlife hunted or trapped by the Tsilhqot’in ancestrally and continuously include: • black and grizzly bears • mountain sheep • caribou • otters • elk • porcupine • foxes • ptarmigan • horses • swans • minks • wild chickens A few species were strongly tabooed and not harvested, including wolves, owls, frogs and snakes (Lane 1981). Hunting grounds were a major consideration in decision making for where to site winter homes (Tsilhqot’in Nation vs. British Columbia Appendix 3 (Government of British Columbia 2007a)). The area of Teztan Biny, Jidizay Biny (Big Onion Lake) and Y’anah Biny was a winter hunting and trapping ground dating back to pre-European contact times and was used until the mid-20th century (Tsilhqot’in Nation vs. British Columbia Appendix 3 (Government of British Columbia 2007a). All wildlife used for procurement are in this area. Deer from the nearby “snow mountains” migrate into this corridor, and rabbit, lynx, muskrat, beaver, squirrel and other furbearing animals are all present (Tsilhqot’in Nation vs. British Columbia Appendix 3 [Government of British Columbia 2007a]). Game was stalked or ambushed along trails (Lane 1981). During the winter, in deep or crusted snow, game would be run down by men on snowshoes with the aid of dogs (Alexander 1997). Other methods of hunting included the use of game fences built over established migration routes, as well as deadfalls, snares and pit falls (Alexander 1997; Lane 1981). Deer was a mainstay of the Tsilhqot’in diet. Deer was hunted in all seasons throughout the year, but was a particular focus for hunting in winter (Alexander 1996). Nearly every part of the deer was used for food: meat, heart, lungs, kidney, stomach, intestines,

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-48 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

hooves, and bladder (Tsilhqot’in Nation vs. British Columbia Appendix 3 [Government of British Columbia 2007a]). Generally, the deer meat was mixed with wild onions when cooked for flavour. Uses of wildlife, other than as food, were numerous and included blankets made from rabbit, snowshoe hare and groundhog (marmot). Blankets were also made from bear skin and woven lynx skin. Mattresses were made from marmot, rabbit, beaver, wolf, bear, deer, mountain goat, mountain sheep and lynx. Marmot, marten and deer were used to make gloves and deer, mountain sheep, mountain goat, marmot and marten were made into moccasins. Doug Hudson also notes that woven goat’s hair blankets, rabbit skins and marmot skins were used as trade items. Only a few Tsilhqot’in had traplines and fur trapping was never a dominant feature of their economy (Alexander 1996). A steep decline in the fur trade occurred in the 1860s once the Canyon Secwepemc, who were important trading partners, were decimated by smallpox (Alexander 1997).

Fish Fish caught by the Tsilhqot’in in the Fish Lake Study area as defined in Ehrhart-English’s study (1994) (Appendix 8-2-B) and identified by Lane (1981) and Alexander (1997) include: • chinook salmon • steelhead • Dolly Varden trout • sturgeons • kokanee salmon • suckers • rainbow trout • trouts • salmons • whitefish • squawfish Fishing occurred year round in different locations. In winter, ice fishing was a core part of the Tsilhqot’in diet and the primary types of fish caught by this method were whitefish, suckers, trout and sturgeon (Alexander 1996). Mabel Williams’ recounts the methods the Tsilhqot’in utilized when ice fishing: “Tsilhqot’ins fished through the ice to get their winter fish at the lakes near their niyah qungh. They would make a hole in the ice where the water is not too deep. Then they’d put something white on the bottom of the lake so they could see the fish going by. They used split chendi (pine) with the inside of the wood facing up. Or they would use rocks to hold down pieces of t’uz (bark) dried from the dan (summer), with the smooth side facing up. Then they would sprinkle fish eggs into the water to attract the fish. Tsilhqot’ins had two different types of spears to get the fish. One was called a danden. That was a pole with a sharp animal bone or horn that faced upwards when you used it. People would put it in the water and pull it up fast when they saw a fish in the right spot. The other type of spear is called dadzagh. It was made with a bone or horn hook too” (Tsilhqot’in Nation vs. British Columbia Appendix 3 [Government of British Columbia 2007a]).

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-49 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

According to Lane (1981), gill nets were set through holes in lake ice, or used with canoes and rafts on open water in the fall. Gorges were used with bait and artificial lures through holes in lake ice, and compound fish hooks may have been used (Lane 1981). After the fish was caught, it was cooked by either being boiled into a soup or roasted on the fire. Teztan Biny (Fish Lake) is noted as a winter fishing site since pre-crown sovereignty (Tsilhqot’in Nation vs. British Columbia Appendix 3 [Government of British Columbia 2007a]). In spring, the Tsilhqot’in migrated based on fish spawning in streams. Primarily at this time rainbow trout was caught through elaborate fishing technologies. Salmon season occurred in late summer, which accounted for a significant portion of the Tsilhqot’in diet. Spring, sockeye, and pink salmon were caught in the rivers and lakes. The calendar months in late summer were named based on the salmon, highlighting their importance: July is jes za meaning “Chinook salmon moon”, August is ts’aman za meaning “sockeye salmon moon” and September is dants’ex za meaning “pink salmon moon” (Tsilhqot’in Nation vs. British Columbia Appendix 3 [Government of British Columbia 2007a]). The Chilko River is the main salmon bearing stream in Tsilhqot’in territory and “lies at the heart of the territory geographically, socially and spiritually” (Tsilhqot’in Nation vs. British Columbia Appendix 3 [Government of British Columbia 2007a: 99]). Salmon fishing was historically done utilizing a “sex (gaff) made of bone”. Today, a sex is still used but is made of iron or steel. The following is a description of how the sex was used: “When the sex is hooked into a fish it detaches from the pole and is hauled to shore by a long line attached to the sex; the line was originally made of ts'ax (sinew) but is now made from rope…The long pole used for the sex would sometimes be left behind in a fishing spot for re-use in the following year.” (Tsilhqot’in Nation vs. British Columbia Appendix 3 [Government of British Columbia 2007a:102]) At times a daden (three-pronged spear) was also used to catch salmon. Salmon would be roasted over the fire or cooked in soups. The main task after catching the salmon was drying it for winter. Salmon was dried on a drying rack made from pine logs lashed with spruce roots (Alexander 1997). The salmon was opened and stretched with sticks before being smoked with aspen. The fish would need to be smoked for at least one week. Once smoked, historically the fish was placed in a cache pit, which would act as storage for the winter months near the fishing sits or near winter campsites (Alexander 1997; Lane 1981). The location of cache pits have been recorded up and down the Chilko River (Tsilhqot’in Nation vs. British Columbia Appendix 3 [Government of British Columbia 2007a]). Pole and tree storage were temporary storage methods at camp (Lane 1981). For the Tsilhqot’in, less predictable and less prolific salmon runs led to greater dependence on other resources, including lake fishing, hunting and the gathering of plants. The dispersed nature of these resources likely contributed to a more nomadic lifestyle (Alexander 1997). The ethnographic research also suggests that the Tsilhqot’in tended to winter in lodges (rather than pit houses) to facilitate pursuit of dispersed and less predictable foods sources, in particular assured access to winter fisheries (Alexander 1996).

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-50 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Vegetation Plant foods were a staple in the Tsilhqot’in diet and places that were abundant and had high yields were well known and often visited. Plants gathered by the Tsilhqot’in in the Fish Lake Study area as defined in Ehrhart-English’s study (1994) (Appendix 8-2-B) include: • aspen • spring beauties (“mountain” and • balsamroot “wild” potatoes) • beartooth • mushroom • blueberries • onions • chokeberries • pines • crowberries • raspberries • cottonwood • saskatoons • gooseberries • soopolallie • huckleberries • strawberries • juniper • thimbleberries • kinnikinnick • wild rhubarb • labrador tea • willows • lily pads Plants gathered by the Tsilhqot’in as indicated in Alexander (1997) also include: • bracket fungus • hawthorn • bunchberries • lichen • cattail • prickly-pear cactus • cherries • roses • cow-parsnip • scrub birch • cranberries • silverweed • currants • skunk cabbage • dogwood • spruce • fireweed In the spring, pine, willow and spruce root are harvested to manufacture fish traps. Available plants for gathering included: pine cambium, balsam roots and sunflower seeds. In early summer the regional landscape begins to bloom and many plants are available for harvesting. The Tsilhqot’in moved into the mountains to harvest in a sustainable manner by selectively harvesting, disseminating plant stems, and occasionally burning select areas (Tsilhqot’in Nation vs. British Columbia Appendix 3 [Government of British Columbia 2007a]). Plants that were harvested at this time include: mountain potato, corn, tubers, tiger lily, wild onion, mountain carrots and beartooth. Minnie Charleyboy explained that plants such as mountain potatoes, beartooth, silverweed, wild onions and sunflowers were cooked at this time in an underground roasting pit (Tsilhqot’in Nation vs. British Columbia Appendix 3 [Government of British Columbia 2007a]). In this season, Tsilhqot’in who had wintered at Fish Lake would have moved up the Snow Mountains, Red Mountain, or Anvil Mountain. March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-51 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

In late summer, berry harvesting and plant gathering occur. At this time berries that are harvested include: saskatoons, raspberries, blueberries, huckleberries, chokecherries, and soapberries. The following describes how the berries were picked and used: “Berries were picked and placed in a tenelh (a bark strip basket) or qats'ay (spruce-root basket). Raspberries and blueberries would be eaten immediately but Saskatoon berries would be dried for later use. Soopolallie (soapberries) were washed and boiled and pressed into solid cakes. Minnie Charleyboy provided visual representation of a berry wash basin made of bark folded at one end called a ?Elax ts'ay. The soapberries would be pressed in a drying rack with a quats’ay (basket) underneath to catch the juice. The juice was then whipped up to make nuwish (“Indian ice cream”)” (Tsilhqot’in Nation vs. British Columbia Appendix 3 [Government of British Columbia 2007a: 95]). At this time numerous plants were also harvested including: willow wood, hay, silverweed, wild rice, wild celery, wild rhubarb and sulh. Wild rice was gathered by taking a raft out onto the lake and pulling the plants out, which were later ground to make a flour (Tsilhqot’in Nation vs. British Columbia Appendix 3 [Government of British Columbia 2007a]). In fall, white bark pink and kinnikinnick are collected. Remaining berries are collected, some of which are dried and stored for winter. Tiger Lily and silverweed are also collected in the valleys (Tsilhqot’in Nation vs. British Columbia Appendix 3 [Government of British Columbia 2007a]). Throughout the year, particularly in winter, fire wood of various tree species is collected. Vegetation was also used for many other purposes than just food. Lodgepole pine, Douglas-fir and spruce were used for various construction including pit house frames, weirs, bridges, drying racks and skin drying frames. These trees and their roots were also used in the manufacture of fish nets and fish spear handles. Nets were also made using silverberry or false dogbane bush. Spruce and birch were used to make canoes and containers. Spruce roots were used for sewing and for fastening poles in pit houses. Softened willow was also used for this latter purpose. Willow brush or swamp grass was used as a cover for pit houses. Pine gum was used to seal containers. Spruce was also used in the manufacture of snowshoes. Bows were made from juniper wood and arrow shafts were made from Saskatoon.

Summary The Tsilhqot’in actively hunted and trapped in the Fish Lake area, which as a site of cultural significant to the Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah). The importance of fishing in the mine development area seems to be related to the amount of trapping or overwintering cattle in the Little Fish Lake area; if these two activities were eliminated, then fishing would take place at another location (Ehrhart-English 1994). Fish Lake was home to members of the Tsilhqot’in for many years and is still considered home to certain families. The Tsilhqot’in have a strong connection to their lands, which are a key source of subsistence activities and a vital part of their culture. The post-contact period saw an increasing rate of change in traditional land use activities as the result of colonial settlement, intermarriage, a new road and town development, the establishment of reserves, the decline of the salmon fisheries and some wildlife populations, and the encroachment of non-traditional land uses (Alexander 1997; Lane 1981). The traditional economy became

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-52 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

a mixed economy. The raising of cattle and horses, and associated hay farming, became increasingly important as a source of food and income to the Tsilhqot’in (Alexander 1997; Lane 1981).

2.4.4 Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Land Use for the Northern Secwepemc The Secwepemc was divided into numerous village-communities (Dawson 1891) and was traditionally a band society composed of a group of closely related families (Secwepemc 2008; Alexander 1997). Wolf and Matthew (1996) states “the extended family was the basic unit that provided food, protection, education and discipline”. Each Secwepemc band had an economic, social and political system (Wolf and Matthew 1996). The Secwepemc bands each had a central gathering location from which the band took its name (Alexander 1997). The village was the basic political unit for the Secwepemc (Alexander 1997). Alexander (1997) cites Teit (1909b) to state “leaders or chiefs were selected for their skills in fishing, hunting, war, or oratory”. Wolf and Matthew (1996) states that each band had a hereditary chief, a position that was passed down from father to son and that “Additional leaders with special skills were selected to oversee hunting trips, war expeditions and ceremonies”. The Secwepemc extended family or household had a headman who served as spokesperson and was responsible for coordinating the families’ activities; however, decisions of larger magnitude were made communally (Alexander 1997). Communal decision-making was and is valued by the Secwepemc as everyone has a voice in the community (Secwepemc 2008); however, Bouchard and Kennedy (1979) state “the decision makers were generally the elderly men, who commanded great respect”. Finally, the territory of a band was defined as the land being used for resources (Alexander 1997), which were viewed as cooperatively owned (Secwepemc 2008). If resources were no longer being used, the Secwepemc membership changed (Alexander 1997). The Secwepmec followed an annual seasonal round for thousands of years that was based on hunting and gathering (Secwepemc Cultural Education Society and SFU 1999). This nomadic lifestyle allowed for travel among fishing grounds, lakes, berry picking, cambium collecting, root digging locations, and hunting grounds in the river valleys (Ignace 1998). During the winter months, bands often congregated in large multi-family winter houses located near waterways and travelled throughout their territory during the warmer summer months (Alexander 1997; Bouchard and Kennedy 1979; Jack et al. 1993; Wolf and Matthew 1996; Ignace 1998). The seasonal use and location of the temporary camps and village sites was based largely on the availability of resources (Alexander 1997). While most bands spent approximately two-thirds of the year camping and traveling, a few bands, especially those located near the prolific fishing grounds of the Fraser-Chilcotin Canyon, were generally sedentary (Ignace 1998). Cycles of salmon runs, migration of wildlife, ripening of berries and climate were integral to the traditional knowledge and survival of the Secwepemc. Table 2-3 illustrates the seasonal subsistence rounds of the Secwepemc.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-53 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Table 2-3 Seasonal Subsistence Rounds of the Shuswap (Secwepemc 2008; Alexander 1997; Wolf and Matthew 1996; Jack et al. 1993) Season Dwelling Subsistence Winter Group- pithouses Short day trips were made for ice fishing and hunting local game. Families would also rely on their winter stores of dried salmon, deer, elk, plants and berries Spring Group- start to travel Fresh edible green shoots of fireweed, cow farther away from parsnip, balsam root and Indian celery were pithouses eaten. Each plant was harvested as they became available and immediately consumed or preserved for future use Early Summer (End of Family- portable structures Large amounts of Saskatoon berries were June) harvested and dried for future use. Other berries such as strawberries, thimble berries, soapberries and raspberries soon followed. Much of the summer was spent gathering a variety of berries Late Summer Family- portable structures Families begin fishing for spring and sockeye salmon at different weir sites and riverbanks. The salmon would be dried and stored for winter usage Fall (September– Family- portable structures The primary activity was hunting. The game October) hunted included deer, elk, caribou, bear, mountain goat, and beaver. Small animals such as grouse and ducks, were mixed with berries and fat and made into dried cakes for storage. As the winter stores grew fuller, the Secwepemc would once again settle into their winter dwellings

As early as 1800, Secwepemc bands north of Dog Creek adopted some of the social practices from coastal groups resulting in certain ownership practices as trade with non- Natives occurred (Alexander 1997). Teit (1909b) remarked in his journals that prior to Simon Fraser’s journey down the river (now Fraser River) only the Northern Secwepemc would have seen white men (in Palmer 2005), therefore being exposed to new material items for ownership. The Secwepemc became heavily involved in fur trade and dried salmon in the first half of the 1800s, especially during the period from the early 1820s to the 1860s with the Hudson’s Bay Company which began to change the economic life of the people (Alexander 1997; Wolf and Matthew 1996; Ignace 1998). This brought on a greater dependence on the trapping of furbearers and the adoption of Euro-Canadian technology, such as twine fish nets, guns, steel traps, wire snares, copper pots, kettles, axes and iron knives, as well as a greater dependence on white foods (Alexander 1997). The second half of the 1800s proved difficult for the Secwepemc as the Gold Rush of 1858 brought over 27,000 white men to the Fraser River, and the small pox episodes of the 1960s and 1975 nearly decimated the community (Palmer 2005; Alexander 1997; Ignace 1998). The culmination of these three events led to the move to permanent villages. A Joint Commission for the settlement of Indian Reserves in the Province of British Columbia established by the Canadian federal and British Columbia provincial

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-54 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

governments set out 100,000 acres of reserve land for the 17 remaining Secwepemc bands (Ignace 1998). This brought the learning of agrarian land use, land reserve struggles, mission education and residential schools (Palmer 2005; Secwepemc Cultural Education Society and SFU 1999; Alexander 1997; Ignace 1998). Throughout these changes, however, the Secwepemc people have maintained many of their traditional land use activities (Alexander 1997). Dawson (1891) notes “native items still constitute notable items in the food of the Shuswap” and that spears and weirs (made from willow) were utilized for fishing salmon. Jack et al. (1993) states: “In spite of these monumental obstacles, Shuswap communities have survived. One element vital to that survival has been the will to continue to practice, and fight to revive, features of their traditional lifestyle and ways of relating to the world…Central to the functioning of current Shuswap communities are elders, who hold the greatest share of the traditional knowledge and the language“. The more recent ethnographic work of Palmer (2005) discusses traditional land use activities still practiced by the Esketemc (Alkali) and the Secwepemc internet site (2008) provides a wealth of information on traditional land use that has been reviewed by community elders.

2.4.4.1 Traditional Land Use Sites In the document “An Overview of the Heritage Significance of the Proposed Power and Transportation Corridors Servicing the Fish Lake Project” commissioned by Taseko in 1993, Ehrhart-English has identified several Northern Secwepemc traditional land use sites. Traditional Land Use sites are summarized by community (refer to Appendix 7-A-1 for further information).

Dog Creek/ Canoe Creek Indian Bands. The proposed power corridor passes through a Canoe Creek trapline. Dog Creek band fish for rainbow trout in the waters of Brigham Lake and their water supply flows into Brigham Lake.

Alkali Lake Band On the west side of the Fraser River moose and deer hunting areas were identified and an important fishing station that is a half mile on their northern side of the proposed power corridor. This fishing station is used for dipnetting sockeye salmon and several depressions were found that could indicate this was a site of cache pits. This site was identified as important to the people of Alkali Lake. On the east side of the Fraser River a large site where deer gather in the spring was identified. The proposed power corridor passes through this deer gathering area. In the Sting-Lake Creek area wild horse winter ranges and duck hunting sites were identified. Choke cherry and soopolallie picking areas were identified along Meason Creek.

Toosey Band The proposed power corridor passes through traplines that are identified as belonging to the Toosey Band.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-55 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Traditional Knowledge The following section will describe the Traditional Knowledge of the Secwepemc. The section is divided into the three sections of wildlife, fish, and vegetation. Each section depicts resources that are a part of Secwepemc traditional livelihoods and how these resources were (and are) utilized.

Wildlife According to Ignace (1988) and Alexander (1997), wildlife hunted by the Secwepemc include: • black bear • mountain sheep • mule deer • mountain goat • moose • caribou • elk Wildlife trapped by the Secwepemc (Ignace 1998; Alexander 1997) include: • beaver • grouse • cougar • marmot/groundhog • coyote • muskrat • duck • otter • ermine • porcupine • fisher • rabbits/hares • fox • squirrels • geese • wolverine • gopher Hunting was more prestigious and ritually significant than fishing (Ignace 1998). The men conducted hunting and trapping primarily in the fall and winter (Jack et al. 1993). Males commonly used bone calls or sounds imitating the animals to attract them in the hunt (Wolf and Matthew 1996). Hunters used snowshoes, traps, snares, barriers, dug out pits, spring traps, corrals, and deer fences to aid in their hunting (Secwepemc 2008). Bows and arrows were also very important in the hunt until the availability of firearms during the nineteenth century (Ignace 1998). Bows were made from juniper wood or yew-wood with the arrowheads made from basalt, obsidian, jade, chert, agate, and quartz (Ignace 1998; Wolf and Matthew 1996), later replaced with iron heads (Ignace 1998). Arrows were made of rosewood or saskatoonberry wood with feather fletching, and bowstrings were composed of twisted sinew (Ignace 1998). Animals were skinned and cleaned on the spot where they were killed (Secwepemc 2008). Prior to 1900 the most commonly hunted game was deer, elk and caribou (Palmer 2005). However, Teit (1909b) reports that by 1850 the elk were virtually extinct (Palmer 2005; Alexander 1997; Ignace 1998). The band records of the Esketemc indicate that the first moose was spotted in the region in the early 1900s, becoming a significant part of the local economy after 1920 when the moose population increased (Palmer 2005; Alexander 1997; Ignace 1998). Today, moose and deer are the most commonly hunted species (Palmer 2005).

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-56 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

The feathers of the loon, Canada goose, duck, eagle, hawk, woodpecker and owl were commonly used for decoration (Wolf and Matthew 1996).

Fish Fish caught by the Secwepemc include (Alexander 1997): • burbot • sturgeons • chiselmouth • salmon (all varieties, including • chub Chinook, Sockeye, Coho, Pink and Kokanee) • dolly varden • suckers • graylings • redside shiner • kokanee • trouts (including Cutthroat and • ling cod Rainbow) • squawfish • whitefish

Salmon was most abundant for the Secwepemc and a vital part of the diet (Dawson 1891). Four species of salmon were found in the Fraser River drainage: sockeye, spring, pink and coho (Alexander 1996). The Secwepemc used all parts of the salmon including the eggs, skin and flesh (Secwepemc 2008). On the Fraser River, it was possible for one individual to catch 300 salmon in one day, and it is estimated that approximately 500 to 600 salmon were consumed per person each year (Alexander 1997). Fish were caught using fish weirs, leisters (three-pronged creek spears), gaffs, basket traps, gill nets, dip nets, pit lamps, or through ice fishing in the winter. Dip nets were made from Indian hemp, cedar bark or fibrous materials from plants and had stones attached as sinkers (Alexander 1997; Ignace 1998) or were attached to a pole approximately four meters long. Men would stand on rocks or platforms and catch the salmon as they traveled upstream (Secwepemc 2008). Basket fish traps were made from willow or small branches woven together and were approximately two to three meters wide at the base of the cone shape (Secwepemc 2008). The cone narrowed in the middle so that the fish had just enough room to pass though (Secwepemc 2008). The small opening combined with the current trapped the fish inside the basket. A fish weir was a long fence constructed of a framework of poles, sticks and brush across streams to trap the fish so that they could be caught using a dip net, spear, or gaff hook (Ignace 1998). Pit lamp fishing occurred in canoes, wherein men used torches of pitch-soaked wood to attract the salmon (Ignace 1998). Finally, ice fishing was conducted in winter where lines were made of material such as deer sinew and hooks were made of stone or bone and bait to lure the fish (Secwepemc 2008). Fishing weirs were prohibited on the Fraser River in the early 1900s, and debris from railway construction in 1913 created barriers to fish migration at Hell’s Gate (Alexander 1997). These two factors reduced the available salmon resource base and this caused a shift to a greater dependence on other fish, as well as the increasing moose population (Alexander 1997). In the Esketemc (Alkali) Traditional Territory, fishing for salmon is now mostly done at night. This keeps the caught fish cool and people say the fish cannot see the nets this way. At first light the fish caught by dip net are taken back to the reserve. Women work together rapidly to smoke, freeze, and can the salmon, following ancient smoking March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-57 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

traditions. In 1987 and 1988 salmon made up a larger share of the Esketemc (Alkali) diet than deer and moose meat did combined. The salmon stocks were so scarce in the 1990s, however, that the Department of Fisheries called for a total ban on coho fishing in 1998. The unreliable salmon stocks have impacted the traditional diet of the Esketemc (Alkali) (Palmer 2005).

Vegetation Over 200 indigenous species of plants were known to the Secwepemc, and of these approximately 50 were used as food items (Ignace 1998). Vegetation gathered by the Secwepemc include (Alexander 1997): • angelica • gooseberries • raspberries • balsam root • grouseberries • rice root • bitter root • hawthorn • roses • black tree moss • hazelnuts • roots • blueberries • huckleberries • sarsaparilla • cambium (especially • johnny jump-ups • saskatoons jack pine) • carrot • kinnikinnick • silverweed • celery • labrador tea • spruce • cherries • lichen • strawberries • cottonwood • lily root • skunk cabbage • cow-parsnip • milkweed • soopolallies • cranberries • mint • spring beauties (“wild” or “mountain” potatoes) • currants • mushrooms • thimbleberries • desert-parsley • nagoonberries • thistle • dogwood • onions • tiger lily • fairy bells • Oregon grape • wild asparagus • false Solomon's-seal • pines • wild nodding onion • fern • potato • wild strawberries • fireweed • polypores • wild sunflower root • firs • prickly-pear cactus • yellow avalanche liles

Berries were a prized food for the Secwepemc and in the summer were sun-dried, or turned into fruit leather or cakes, to last throughout the winter (Ignace 1998). There was a special ceremony for the berry picking season (Secwepemc 2008): “The First Fruit Ceremony was held at the beginning of each picking season which started around the end of June and ran through to the end of August. This ceremony was a way for the Secwepemc people to show appreciation for the berry crop they were about to harvest. The Chief would announce the beginning of the berry picking season, which came at different times depending on the type of berry, and everyone would March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-58 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

gather at the picking grounds. The women would set up camp on the first day. On the second day the berry branches would be broken, gathered and brought back to the women. This was also a way to prune the bushes so that new branches would grow the following year. The women would then hit the branches using a small stick and the berries would fall onto the hide. Leaves, sticks and insects were picked out of the berries. For transport the berries were poured into a birch bark tray lined with large leaves. The leaves helped to absorb the juice of the squished berries. Once back at the camp the berries were washed in cold water and thoroughly dried. They were placed in rawhide storage bags or wrapped in bark for storage. They were usually stored in underground pits”. Roots were gathered in early spring before the leaves were in bud. Roots were eaten raw, dried or cooked. There were many methods for cooking roots such as roasting in hot ashes, steaming or boiling in baskets of water, or cooking in the earth oven in a pit in the ground. Roots were also used to make baskets, most commonly from cedar, spruce, or birch, but cherry was also used for decoration (Secwepemc 2008). Trees such as Douglas fir, were used for making structures including summer houses and smoking racks (Secwepemc 2008). Plants and foliage were collected for food, such as wild onions and potatoes, and were used for medicinal purposes (Secwepemc 2008). One study has reported that “over 135 species of plants are reported as being of known use as food, medicine, or construction material in the more diverse ecosystems in the Secwepemc Kamloops Division territory to the south of Alkali Lake” (Palmer 2005). One elder from Esketemc (Alkali) notes that cattle grazing has significantly reduced the diversity of plant life in the communities traditional territory and that the avalanche lily and mariposa lily can now rarely be found in bloom (Palmer 2005). A final importance of vegetation is for traditional medicines, many of them as preventative tonics and purgatives (Ignace 1998). Labrador tea and juniper are two examples of plants used by the Secwepemc for medicinal purposes. Other examples include, balsam bark that was used for respiratory diseases and influenza, soopolallie sticks were used as a purgative and fir pitch was used as an external remedy for curing infections and extracting slivers (Ignace 1998). According to Brow (1972) until changes were made to the Indian Act in 1951, community members from Esketemc (Alkali) relied solely on traditional medicines except in the case of tuberculosis when community members were brought to hospital (Palmer 2005). Traditional medicines remain an important part of the culture of the Secwepemc people.

Summary Today, the Secwepemc continue to have a strong connection to their traditional territory. They continue to pick berries, dip net during salmon season, fish for traditional ceremonial lake fish, and utilize resources for medicinal purposes. Their traditional territory is being reduced by cattle grazing and ranchers who fence off sections of land and do not permit access to the Secwepemc people (Palmer 2005). Traditional subsistence activities such as hunting, fishing, and trapping are still carried out; however, many of the staple foods are now store-bought potatoes, flour, rice, and beans. They assert that any treaty they sign will have to incorporate their relationship to the land as its stewards.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-59 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

2.4.5 Traditional Knowledge and Land Use in the Effects Assessment and Project Design

2.4.5.1 Incorporation into the Scope of Assessment Traditional knowledge and land use information, along with First Nations input to the project through working groups and First Nations responses to EIS guidelines, assisted in the refinement of the scope of assessments for the Project. Examples of integrating First Nations knowledge into the effects assessment are provided below: • Vegetation Assessment (Volume 5, Section 5)—The EIS guidelines requires documentation of ambient concentrations of trace elements in wetland and upland vegetation to determine the potential for contamination of vegetation which may be consumed by wildlife or people. A variety of vegetation samples were collected in 1995. Meetings with representative First Nations revealed that Labrador tea (Ledum groenlandicum) were traditionally used. Additional sampling and analysis was completed to include Labrador tea and confirm that existing conditions were consistent with previous samples. Collated sample data and results of the analyses are summarized in the Trace Metals in Vegetation Technical Report (Volume 5, Appendix 5-5-D). • Wildlife Assessment (Volume 5 Section 6)—Input received from First Nations during working groups and in response to EIS guidelines contributed to the identification of key issues arising from the interaction of the Project with wildlife and wildlife habitat, and the selection of key indicator species for the assessment. Cultural values to First Nations for mule deer, moose, grizzly bear, black bear, fisher, mallard, Barrow’s goldeneye and sharp-tailed grouse. And the inference from the results of effects on studied KI species (for example, the loss of immature, mature and old forest types on black bear denning habitat, and mule deer and moose winter shelter habitat) to other species of interest to First Nations, such as the porcupine. As a result of First Nations input, Feral horses, although not identified as a KI, were included in the wildlife affects assessment such that potential road mortality was identified and mitigation measures implemented to minimize the vehicle-related mortality risk. • Archaeology Impact Assessment (Volume 7)—Based on First Nations history in the Fish Lake area, the entire maximum disturbance area at the proposed mine site was subject to intensive survey coverage at their request. No AOA was used to guide survey routes or intensity. This resulted in a comprehensive field assessment over a 3476.5 ha area to identify archaeological sites of importance, and historic sites of value to First Nations. • Resource Uses (Volume 6; Section 5)—Based on First Nations traditional use of the project area, and with their input through working groups and consultation, agriculture and ranching, fishing, hunting and trapping were selected as resource uses that were potentially affected by the project and adopted as key indicators for the assessment.

2.4.5.2 Effects Analysis The effects analysis on TUS has drawn most of its information from two cultural/heritage studies, as well as documentation on public record. Taseko commissioned heritage

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-60 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

significance analysis of the Fish Lake area and the transmission corridor (Ehrhart-English 1994 and 1993, respectively). Since Taseko was unsuccessful at their attempts to initiate additional CIA studies with the TNG, Esketemc (Alkali), Stswecem’c/Xgat’tem (Canoe Creek), and T’exelcemc (Williams Lake) in 2007 and 2008, reliance on other existing literature sources was required. The BC Ministry of Forests has commissioned two cultural heritage overviews, one for the Cariboo Forest Region (Alexander 1997) and another for the western half of the Williams Lake Forest District (Alexander 1996). The BC Supreme Court case produced numerous documents concerning the traditional use, heritage and culture of First Nations in their claim area, which included Fish Lake. This literature base was reviewed for a description of traditional uses as well as for insights into how First Nations might be affected by the project.

2.4.5.3 Project Effects on Fish and Fish Habitat The traditional knowledge and land use information clearly identifies the significant sustenance and cultural values that First Nations place upon the salmon fishery. As a result, the protection of the salmon fishery and the water quality of the Taseko River was of highest priority to Taseko and subsequently influenced the design of the Project. Examples of incorporation of these values into the project design include: • Development of a Fisheries Compensation Plan (Volume 3, Section 8) that includes Prosperity Lake to replace Fish Lake as a sustenance fishery to complement the salmon fishery • Development of the current one-watershed Project Design in the alternatives assessment (Volume 3, Section 6: Mine Plan and Volume 2, Section 6: Assessment of Alternatives and Selection of the Proposed Project) lead that minimizes the environmental risk to the Taseko River and salmon fishery, and allows zero water discharge during the life of the project. Based on traditional use information, it is understood that a portion of the Tsilhqot’in First Nations total annual fishing activities and catch comes from the spring harvest of rainbow trout at Fish Lake; though the bulk of their annual catch likely comes from salmon fishing. The loss of Fish Lake and its inlet and outlet spawning habitat and populations will eliminate this source and abundance of fish for First Nation harvest during operations. The effects of the loss of Fish Lake as a source for fish will be only temporary (estimated to be 3–5 years) until Prosperity Lake is fully functioning and supporting a viable population of fish. In addition to developing a compensation lake in the watershed to provide for a self sustaining trout population to maintain the genetic integrity of the Fish Lake population, a series of mitigation and compensation strategies are proposed to offset the Fish Creek watershed habitat, population and angling losses for the life of the project and until the fish Creek watershed is restored. The effects of the Project on Fish and Fish Habitat, as well as mitigation and compensation strategies are provided in Volume 5, Section 3 (Biotic Environment) and Volume 3, Section 8 (Fisheries Compensation Plan). Related mitigation strategies are also presented in other volumes of the EIS. Strategies include:

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-61 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

• Protection of water quality and salmon fisheries through a one watershed project design with zero discharge during operations (Volume 3, Section 9: Water Management Plan; Volume 3, Section 6: Mine Plan). • Application of reclamation practices (Volume 3, Section 9: Reclamation and Decommissioning Plan) to restoration disturbed riparian sites in the local area. • A fish culture facility to help maintain the Fish Lake genetic stock, provide angling opportunities in other lakes and within the context of government/First Nation agreements, potentially provide First Nation harvest opportunities (Volume 3, Section 8: Fisheries Compensation Plan). • Potential First Nation involvement in the implementation, monitoring and management of mitigation and compensation activities, as well as participation in the fish culture activities for the life of the Project is discussed in the Fish and Fish Habitat EA section. This can provide education, employment, business and relationship benefits (Volume 3, Section 8: Fisheries Compensation Plan). • Development of a Water Management Plan with an erosion and sedimentation control component (Volume 3, Section 9) to minimize the project’s impact on water quality and fisheries habitat in areas outside the Fish Creek drainage. • Avoidance of sensitive riparian ecosystems during the final alignment of the transmission corridor (Volume 3, Section 6: Mine Plan).

2.4.5.4 Project Effects on Wildlife The entire wildlife component of the Taseko EA will be of interest to First Nations; however, the detailed effects assessments for mule deer, porcupine, moose, grizzly bear, black bear, waterfowl (mallard and Barrow’s goldeneye), and sharp-tailed grouse are likely of particular interest because of the cultural and/or subsistence values associated with these species. The four potential Project related environmental effects on wildlife and wildlife habitat are as follows: • Effects on habitat availability—resulting from direct habitat loss or alteration, and/or indirect loss or alteration from sensory disturbance (e.g., noise, human activity), and reduction of habitat patch size (i.e., increased habitat fragmentation) • Disruption of movement patterns—resulting from increased habitat/landscape fragmentation (e.g., increased density of access corridors, increased cleared area) or higher road use levels limiting daily or seasonal wildlife travel • Increase in direct mortality risk—resulting from site development, vehicle collisions, transmission lines strikes, increased hunting/poaching, lethal control of problem wildlife, or reduction in secure habitat availability due to habitat fragmentation • Reduction in animal health—resulting from contamination of air, soil, water or food sources (vegetation, prey species) or changes in food source abundance/composition. The effects of the Project on wildlife and mitigation measures are discussed fully in Volume 5, Section 6. The mitigation measures proposed to minimize or eliminate the residual Project effects on wildlife are many, but include: reclamation, minimization of clearing area, avoidance of wetlands and non-pine forest for transmission line routing, minimal development of new road access along the transmission line, implementation of a Bear Aware program for mine site, consideration of breeding bird timing windows, and

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-62 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

driver awareness training. In addition, the following are proposed to be implemented to minimize impacts on wildlife and wildlife habitat: • Development of an Air Quality and Noise Management Plan (Volume 3, Section 9) to minimizing noise effects on wildlife and dust impacts on wildlife habitat. • Application of general reclamation practices for the re-establishment of wildlife habitat, particularly for ungulates, bear, waterfowl and small mammals (Volume 3, Section 9). • Development of a Vegetation and Wildlife Management Plan (Volume 3, Section 9), and Access Management Plan to minimize disturbance and impacts on lands accessed from the mine site to adjacent valued wildlife habitat. • Avoidance of sensitive ecosystems, including minimizing disturbance in grasslands, during the final routing of the transmission corridor (Volume 3, Section 6: Mine Plan).

2.4.5.5 Project Effects on Vegetation Project effects to vegetation may affect First Nations both through loss of vegetation species of interest or value and through the loss or alteration of vegetation communities that provide habitat for a range of wildlife species of interest/value. The effects of the project on vegetation is discussed fully in Volume 5, Section 5. In reviewing the TUS information, a number of plants of interest to First Nations were identified; however, many of the plant species mentioned do not occur in the study area (e.g., mountain potato, pine nuts) and are not expected to be affected by the project. Some species (e.g., rice, bear tooth, wild rhubarb, mountain carrots) are not identifiable without genus/species information or at least additional context/habitat information. Some of the species identified are very common (e.g., lodgepole pine, which is used for cambium stripping and firewood) and it is considered unlikely that this species would be of special concern to local First Nations because it is widely distributed throughout the region and will likely be killed off by pine beetle even without the Project. A few of the species noted to be of interest in the do occur in the study area and can be associated with specific habitat types. For instance Allium cernuum (nodding onion) is found in some of the grassland associations, including the Juniper-kinnikinnik grassland that occurs in the minesite. However, these ecosystems are locally common on the west facing bluffs above the Taseko River and the project has only a very minimal effect on the availability of ecosystems within the RSA. A variety of berry species were also noted in the TUS, and several of these species were included in sampling for baseline vegetation metals and will be part of the ongoing monitoring program defined within the reclamation plan. Strategies to minimize the project’s effect on vegetation include: • Development of a Vegetation and Wildlife Management Plan (Volume 3, Section 9) to minimize the project’s footprint and disturbance of valued ecosystems adjacent to and accessible from the project site. • Development of an Air Quality and Noise Management Plan (Volume 3, Section 9) to minimize the dust impacts on country foods.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-63 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

• Application of general reclamation practices, including a soils handling plan (Volume 3, Section 9), to enable the re-establishment of productive opens, meadows and forested areas for traditional species of interest. • Avoidance of sensitive ecosystems, including disturbance in grasslands, during final routing of the transmission corridor (Volume 3, Section 6: Mine Plan).

2.4.5.6 Summary of Project Effects on First Nations Cultural Heritage An assessment of the cultural heritage effects of the Project on First Nations is provided in Volume 6, Section 3. The cultural heritage effects of the proposed project at Fish Lake will be felt mainly by the Xeni Gwet’in since they have been using the area relatively continuously for at least the last 150 years. It is also noted that among the Tsilhqot'in, particularly the Yunesit’in and Xeni Gwet’in, various families from different bands roamed the entire region, with the timing, frequency and duration of use dictated by game and fish availability at any one time. The loss of Fish Lake and disturbances within the mine footprint will result in the loss of an area that has important cultural meaning for many Tsilhqot'in people. This culturality is expressed in the fishing, trapping, hunting, cabins and other traditional use experiences and sites that have attracted people to this area over time. Development of the mine site and TSF will result in the inundation of trapping and hunting areas and the direct loss of Fish Lake itself. Deer, moose, grouse and squirrel are harvested around Fish Lake and these opportunities would be displaced until post-closure (Ehrhart-English 1994). Fishing activity at the existing Fish Lake would be lost but there is a reasonable expectation that fishing opportunities at a newly created lake (Prosperity Lake) would at least partially offset this loss. There is some evidence to suggest that fishing by the Xeni Gwet’in has declined since the William and Solomon families departed Little Fish Lake in the early 1970s. This is because fishing is historically conducted in proximity to trapping areas and over-wintering areas for cattle. It is noted, however, that First Nations members likely constitute a good portion of use documented in recent lake fishing surveys. Cultural sites such as the remnants of the William family and Salomon family domiciles at Little Fish Lake will also be lost. Plant gathering is the activity least likely to be affected by the project, as most species still collected exist outside of the mine buffer area, or there are other equally suitable sites for collection (Ehrhart-English 1994). The transmission line is also likely to affect cultural heritage values both for the Tsilhqot’in and the Northern Secwepemc, but the ethnographic information for the corridor is not as well documented as it is for Fish Lake. Still, the line will traverse traditional travel routes and as it proceeds east moves through gradually more intensive traditional use zones from montane forest, to intermediate grasslands and finally to high use river terraces/valleys. Generally, the density of sites in the grasslands was low but some preferred campsites could have seen reuse for a variety of gathering, procurement and ceremonial purposes. The river valleys of the Fraser and Chilcotin were very important for fishing base camps and hunting/butchering spots (Alexander 1996). As well as lodges and other buildings, these sites would have supported trade activities and a wide variety of social activities. Higher up on the terraces is where the winter villages of the Northern Secwepemc would have been located. The other project components, including the transportation routes and improvement to the load out facility near Macalister, are not expected to have measurable impacts on cultural heritage values. These facilities already exist and thus characterize baseline conditions.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-64 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Fish Creek will be less accessible than it is today if the existing access road is decommissioned or not maintained. The new access road will have strict access control. Movement or modification of the tailings pond to avoid historical sites at Little Fish Lake were considered not feasible for economic reasons. Mitigating the effects of the project on cultural heritage values is primarily addressed in other volumes and sections namely: • control local hunting pressure and preserve opportunities for First Nations hunters • displaced by the mine (Volume 6, Section 5) • address lost trapping territories (Volume 6, Section 5) • address displaced ranching activity (Volume 6, Section5) • replace and enhance the First Nations’ food/ceremonial fisheries as noted in the Fisheries Compensation Plan (Volume 3, Section 8)

Characterization of Residual Project Effects The Project will have an adverse effect on cultural heritage values for the Tsilhqot’in people and more specifically members of the Xeni Gwet’in whose families have traditionally occupied the Little Fish Lake area. The magnitude of the effect is difficult to characterize. Although the Xeni Gwet’in’s asserted traditional territory has many other areas that support the types of traditional activities at Fish Lake, the one ethnographic study conducted on the mine site area did document a consistent pattern of use since 1860 and permanent habitation by one family between 1930 and 1971. The effects will occur once construction activities begin, will continue indefinitely and are considered irreversible because the physical setting, though it may be capable of restoring baseline conditions for traditional activities like hunting and fishing post-closure, will be permanently altered.

Cumulative Effects The focus of this analysis has been on the effects of the mine site and mine buffer on Xeni Gwet’in members and families. Any interactions between other operating mines, proposed or potential mine projects is considered minimal and unlikely to create cumulative effects. The mountain pine beetle is expected to exert considerable cumulative effects on cultural heritage values and traditional use. The majority of Tsilhqot’in territory is dominated by lodgepole pine forests which have been the foundation of Tsilhqot’in existence over time. The following effects are expected (Read and Associates and Stonefield Consulting 2007): • The MPB is destroying wildlife habitat and plants relied upon by community members, hunting pressure is increasing as new roads for logging are developed, and reduced forest cover is adversely affecting water temperatures and fish habitat. • As the forest is lost to the epidemic, cultural places will be lost “It will become increasingly difficult to maintain the culture because Tsilhqot’in customs are forest based”. • Social structure and activities are inextricably linked to the forest, and are susceptible to the changing environment. • The lack of access to employment and economic opportunities close to reserves will worsen once forest jobs are lost to the epidemic.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-65 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

• In this context, the destruction of the forest due to MPB will have effects on cultural heritage values that are spatially and temporally much more adverse and potentially devastating than those that might be expected to result from the Project.

Determination of Significance The Project will disturb a very small area of the LSA and RSA, as well as a minor proportion of the asserted traditional territory of the Xeni Gwet’in. Although the recent Tsilhqot'in Nation vs. British Columbia judgment (2008) did not recognize Aboriginal title to the Eastern Trapline Territory, which includes Fish Lake, rights have been declared and regular habitation and use since European contact has been documented. Project mitigation measures and the limited spatial extent of disturbances to the land and resource base should minimize the effects on traditional uses, but in the absence of direct impact statements from First Nations, we are unable to determine the significance of Project effects on cultural heritage values.

Confidence in Predictions Our understanding of traditional use areas, sites and other ethnographic characteristics of the LSA and RSA is limited, but for the most part documented in the Tsilhqot'in Nation vs. British Columbia judgment (2008). The Ehrhart-English (1994) report did work closely with Xeni Gwet’in elders at the time and we have assumed accurately portrayed traditional uses and the most likely effects of the Project. However, we also recognize that more recent traditional use studies prepared for the TNG were not made available to the study team and that therefore possible insights into Project effects on cultural heritage values is lacking. For this reason we have a low degree of confidence in our effects predictions.

2.5 Taseko’s Engagement and Consultation The following section describes Taseko’s First Nation Engagement and Consultation activities for the preparation of this Project’s EIS. Taseko believes First Nation engagement and consultation is integral to the EA process. Addressing First Nations concerns in the early stages of the EA provides direction for the Project Team and their studies. A variety of consultation and engagement mechanisms include: Project notifications, follow-up phone calls, letters and emails, presentations, and meetings with Chief and Council, Tribal Councils, Elders, individual members and staff. The following section describes engagement and consultation activities for each of the First Nations communities in the RSA. A detailed overview of all First Nation consultation and engagement activities can be found in Appendix 8-2-A of this Volume, and is also summarized in Volume 2: Project Planning and Alternatives Assessment, Section 5: Information Consultation and Distribution. Taseko provided copies of this EIS to the First Nations within the RSA for information and consultation purposes. During the EA review stage, Taseko will further consult with these First Nations in accordance with the consultation process outlined in Section 2.8.5 of this Volume.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-66 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

2.5.1 Engagement and Consultation Core Values Taseko’s Engagement and Consultation Strategy during the preparation of this EIS was based on the following core values: • First Nation engagement and consultation would provide input to assist the Project Team in effective project design, construction and post closure activities. • First Nation engagement and consultation would provide environmental and local cultural awareness key in developing a sound project. • A First Nation Consultation and Engagement Strategy would be determined in conjunction with each First Nation. • Funding to support capacity building within the First Nation to promote understanding of the Project would be available on a First Nation basis. • All First Nations agreements would be kept confidential.

2.5.2 Engagement and Consultation Objectives The following is an outline regarding Taseko’s objectives with First Nations within the RSA with respect to engagement and consultation: • Promote effective, proactive and responsive communications with concerned First Nation, Tribal Councils and agencies. • Build an understanding of the Taseko Prosperity Mine Plan and Environmental Assessment through continuous dialogue and information exchange. • Engage with First Nations in a timely, transparent consultation process designed to meet the needs of the local First Nations communities, determine the appropriate consultation program and engagement methods for each First Nation. • Seek to have all communications accurately documented in the “Tables of First Nations Engagement and Consultation” (Appendix 8-2-A). • Capture communications between the Taseko’s representatives and First Nations to ensure that concerns are included in the EA. • Develop and carry out appropriate Commitments to First Nations during all phases of the Project.

2.5.3 First Nations Agreements The Project mine site component is located within an area which the Tsilhqot'in claim as their Traditional Territory, and for which the Xeni Gwet'in (Nemiah) and Yunesit’in (Stone) assert that they are caretakers. The mine site is also within the Esketemc (Alkali) Traditional Territory. A Letter of Intent (agreement) was developed between the two parties represented by the Tsilhqot’in National Government (Taseko and the TNG) to set out the terms of their relationship during the initial period of study and planning for the Project. This was developed to ensure the TNG, which reserved judgment on the Project but committed to participate in the EA process, had the ability to understand the Prosperity Project during the information gathering and pre-filing phase of the EA. The Letter of Intent was developed to assist with the following: • retention of an internal TNG member as a mining coordinator • funding to the TNG for their Stewardship Council to review baseline studies • retention of a socio-economic advisor

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-67 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

• TNG participation in the comprehensive 2007 archaeological study in the mine site area • TNG participation in 2006 and 2008 biophysical field programs • TNG participation in the 2007 exploration and drilling program • provide for TNG legal counsel to ensure the protection of their Rights and Title • financing community meetings and per diems for leadership attendance at meetings • funding for TNG administrative costs First Nation Capacity Agreements are considered confidential unless the First Nation requests the agreement be given to the government agencies as part of the record of engagement and consultation. The Letter of Intent, which was first agreed upon in 2006, entered into a second phase in 2007 and 2008 during the pre-application stage. Prior to filing the EA, the Letter of Intent was dissolved as the TNG rescinded their commitment to participate in the EA.

2.5.4 Overview of Prosperity’s First Nation Engagement and Consultation Activities Taseko began implementing their First Nation Engagement and Consultation Strategy in 1993, with the First Nation communities in closest proximity to the proposed Project mine site, access roads and transaction corridor, and transmission line. These First Nation communities included: Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah), Yunesit'in (Stone), Esketemc (Alkali) and Stswecem’c/Xgat’tem (Canoe Creek). Between 1993 and 1996, Taseko had a series of meetings with leadership within TNG, which, at that time, represented five First Nation communities: Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah), Yunesit’in (Stone), Tsi Del Del (Alexis Creek), ?Esdilagh (Alexandria) and Tl’etinqox-t’in (Anaham). The TNG does not represent the Tl’esqox (Toosey), who are represented by the Carrier Chilcotin Tribal Council (CCTC); however the Tl’esqox (Toosey) have worked closely with the TNG and participated in TNG meetings with Taseko. As the engagement and consultation process evolved, Taseko held a series of meetings and distributed information booklets in the individual communities. During the late 1990s and from 2004 to 2008, nine Tsilhqot’in and Northern Secwepemc communities were engaged with Taseko on the Prosperity Project. Engagement with the Ulkatcho, Llenlleney’ten (High Bar) and Xat’sull/Cmetem (Soda Creek) communities were initiated late in 2008 as the Provincial Government suggested these First Nations should also be consulted. There are now 12 First Nations included in Taseko’s First Nation Engagement and Consultation Strategy. The Taseko Mines Prosperity Project Table of First Nation Engagement and Consultation (Appendix 8-2-A) represents a compilation of issues by both representative First Nations Governments or Tribal Councils as well as by individual First Nations communities. The Table consists of data in the following columns: • First Nation and/or First Nation Government • Description of Meeting • Who Attended and Date • Concerns or Issues Raised

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-68 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

The next section provides an outline of the issues identified by each First Nation as well as an overview of the First Nation community, demographics and consultation activities undertaken for each First Nation.

2.5.4.1 Tsilhqot’in The following section provides a description of the consultation process with the Tsilhqot’in people which includes the Tsilhqot’in National Government, ?Esdilagh (Alexandria), Tsi Del Del (Alexis Creek), Tl’etinqox-t’in (Anaham), Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah), Yunesit’in (Stone) and Tl’esqox (Toosey). Ulkatcho has only recently been engaged as directed by Government in the Prosperity Project. The methods of communication included letters, meetings, informal meetings, treaty workshops, faxes, emails, reports, presentations, site tours, conferences, newsletters and telephone communications. A summary of consultation methods is provided below.

Tsilhqot’in National Government First Nation groups represented by the TNG during the consultation process before 2000 included: ?Esdilagh (Alexandria), Tsi Del Del (Alexis Creek), Tl’etinqox-t’in Government Office (Anaham), Xeni Gwet’in First Nations Government (Nemiah), and Yunesit’in (Stone). The Tl’esqox (Toosey) are represented by the Carrier Chilcotin Tribal Council (CCTC); however, they participated in TNG meetings with Taseko. During EA consultation process prior to 2000, Taseko met with TNG 29 times between September 1993 and February 1999. Taseko representatives met with TNG two times between November 1993 and July 1995 to conduct a Project/First Nation workshop. Two meetings were held between November 1993 and July 1995, where First Nations expressed how the government should stop allowing mining companies to explore on their lands. Eight meetings occurred between Taseko and TNG representatives between September 1996 to December 1997, to discuss the consultation process with TNG and how to build Taseko’s credibility. A total of 31 letters were exchanged between Taseko and TNG between March 1992 and February 1999. Four letters were First Nation’s requests to be informed of Project updates from and letters from Taseko to the TNG providing Project details. Three letters addressed the TNG and Taseko concern regarding communication and how to better relationship between the two. Two letters discussed potential employment opportunities, two letters were sent by Taseko to TNG attempting to confirm the need to proceed with the archaeology studies. After 2000, extensive contact was made between Taseko and the TNG between July 8, 2004 and May 9, 2008. This included 39 meetings that occurred between TNG staff and Taseko, 23 letters, 62 telephone calls, and 176 emails that were exchanged. A number of meetings occurred between TNG Director of Government Services, Joe Alphonse, other TNG representatives, and Taseko staff. Approximately 13 of these meetings centered around Option 3 (draining of Fish Lake), multiple accounts analysis (MAE), and DFO policy. In addition, over 25 emails, phone calls and letters were exchanged between Taseko and TNG regarding the drainage of Fish Lake. The TNG has participated in news press releases and radio broadcasts describing their opposition to the draining of Fish Lake (Option 3).

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-69 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

On August 16, 2006 Taseko staff met with TNG Director, Loretta Williams to engage in an archaeology site visit of Fish Lake. Taseko also transported Elders and TNG staff to Fish Lake for another archaeology site visit of Fish Lake in August of 2006. An additional five meetings focused on Archaeology of Fish Lake and permitting. Over 16 phone calls and emails were exchanged. Representatives from Taseko were invited to a Community Presentation Strategy Meeting at the TNG office which occurred on January 9, 2007 regarding consulting the TNG communities prior to the Williams Lake Open House.

Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah) During the EA consultation process prior to 2000, Taseko representatives met on 8 occasions with Chief Roger William of Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah) and / or other individuals affiliated with Xeni Gwet’in between July 1992 and January 1999. Meetings were held to and build a relationship between Taseko and Xeni Gwet’in, answer questions about the Prosperity project and offer information about mining procedures generally. Job creation, land use planning, wildlife and health effects were also discussed. Two of the meetings included visits to the Prosperity site. On May 14, 1996 Chief Roger William confirmed that he wanted the TNG to speak for him and his community. He indicated that because Xeni Gwet’in and Yunesit’in (Stone) both have claims in the area that the TNG will deal with Taseko. Between August 1995 and September 1998, 2 telephone calls were held between Taseko representatives and Chief Roger William regarding consultation and hiring procedures. Several other attempts to contact Xeni Gwet’in by telephone were made regarding hiring local people for work at the site. A total of 12 letters were exchanged directly between Taseko representatives and Xeni Gwet’in between October 1992 and January 1999. The letters were sent to provide general updates, address concerns and provide literature about the Prosperity project. During the same time frame copies of three letters sent to the Inspector of Mines and the Minister of the Environment, Lands and Parks were exchanged as well. After 2000, Taseko made 14 telephone calls and sent one email to Chief William of Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah) between September 21, 2004 to April 18, 2005 in attempts to inform him of survey work at Prosperity and to request a meeting. Thirteen letters were sent between Taseko and Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah). Taseko sent three letters to Chief Roger William between November 5, 2005 and May 2008 updating them of Project status of the extension of the environmental approval process. Four letters were exchanged between Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah) and Taseko regarding the panel review and TNG’s letter to the EAO and CEAA in respect to consultation methods and panel review. Eighteen meetings occurred April 2005 and May 2008 between Taseko and Chief and Council from TNG and Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah) primarily to discuss LOI, Prosperity Project updates, DFO regulations and Option 3 (draining of Fish Lake). One meeting between TNG Director and TNG Chiefs and Taseko occurred on January 6, 2006 regarding the consultation process between Taseko and First Nations. Forty-seven emails were exchanged between Taseko and Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah) between April 2005 and July 2008. The majority of emails exchanged were meeting requests and verifications. In addition, an archaeological field visit was held for Elders and other band members and TNG staff to the Fish Lake Archaeology Field Site on September 7, 2006.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-70 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Tsi Del Del (Alexis Creek) During the EA consultation process prior to 2000, Taseko met on two occasions with Chief Ervin Charleyboy of Tsi Del Del (Alexis Creek) to discuss the Declaration of the Chilcotin Nation. Taseko hosted Chief Ervin Charleyboy to attend a conference by the Canadian Aboriginal Mining Association in Thunder Bay. Taseko sent two AIA Reports to Tsi Del Del (Alexis Creek). In addition, Taseko received two letters from Chief Ervin Charleyboy discussing interests of the Tsilhqot’in Nation. After 2000, Taseko met with TNG Chiefs and Chief and Council of Tsi Del Del (Alexis Creek) 10 times between December 2004 and May 2008. Three meetings occurred between February 24 and November 17, 2006 that addressed Option 3 (draining of Fish Lake) and Multiple Accounts Evaluation (MAE) and impacts on wildlife. Seven meetings occurred between December 2004 and May 2008 that focused on Prosperity Project updates, and addressing Project concerns. Chief Ervin Charleyboy of Tsi Del Del (Alexis Creek) and TNG Chiefs and Council were copied on two letters that were sent to the CEA Agency and EAO by Taseko regarding the panel review.

?Esdilagh (Alexandria) During the EA consultation process prior to 2000, Taseko met on four occasions with Chief Tommy Billyboy of ?Esdilagh (Alexandria) to discuss concern over development of the Project in traditional territory and employment for First Nations by Taseko between March 1992 and March 1993. Four AIA Reports titled The Heritage Significance of the Fish Lake Study Area: Ethnography were sent to ?Esdilagh (Alexandria) between August 1989 and July 1995. Two letters were sent between March 1992 and November 1993. After 2000, seven meetings occurred from December 14, 2004 to August 7, 2008 between ?Esdilagh (Alexandria) and representatives from Taseko. Three meetings occurred between December 14, 2004 and September 13, 2006 regarding Option 3 (draining of Fish Lake) and impacts on wildlife. Taseko held two meetings regarding Project details and employment opportunities for ?Esdilagh (Alexandria) which occurred between November 17, 2006 and February 8, 2008. A request for a tour of Gibraltar Mines was made by Loretta Williams of TNG Stewardship Council, at a meeting that occurred on July 5, 2008 between Taseko TNG staff. Taseko Mines provided a bus tour for ?Esdilagh on August 7, 2008 which focused on future employment opportunities, and followed the tour a presentation. In addition, Taseko made two phone calls to ?Esdilagh to confirm the mine tour and to provide additional information regarding potential future employment for the Project. Taseko telephone TNG to confirm tour. Taseko also held a general community meeting with ?Esdilagh (Alexandria) representatives and was attended by Chief and Council. The meeting focused on environmental issues, the court case, employment and progress with the CEA Agency and EAO.

Tl’etinqox-t’in (Anaham) During the EA consultation process prior to 2000, Taseko met on two occasions with Chief Gerald Johnny of Tl’etinqox-t’in (Anaham) to discuss the Declaration of the

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-71 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Chilcotin Nation between August 1992 and March 1993. Taseko sent five reports (AIA and the Native Ethnographic Study report) to Tl’etinqox-t’in (Anaham). In addition, Taseko staff met with local media stating their position and development proposal for the Prosperity Project. After 2000, Taseko had a brief discussion meeting with Joe Alphonse, TNG Director and TNG Chiefs on February 8, 2006, and a “Chiefs Meeting” on September 13, 2006 which focused on Option 3 (draining of Fish Lake). Taseko also discussed the EA process and employment opportunities with Tl’etinqox-t’in (Anaham) via telephone.

Yunesit’in (Stone) During the EA consultation process prior to 2000, Taseko staff members met with TNG and Yunesit’in (Stone) representatives 15 times between March 1993 and February 1994. The meetings primarily focused on Project proposals, and memorandum of understanding. These meetings involved Taseko’s Heritage consultants and Yunesit’in (Stone) to discuss and review how development might affect Yunesit’in (Stone) traditional lands. In addition, Taseko initiated a site visit by Quest Drilling to meet prospective workers, and held a meeting to discuss a site visit for Elders to visit Fish Lake. A total of ten letters and faxes were exchanged between Lawyer David Patterson of Mandell Pinder, Yunesit’in (Stone), and Taseko from December 1993 and January 1994 regarding project details and attempts by Taseko to contact the Yunesit’in (Stone). After 2000, 13 meetings were held December 2004 and May 2008 between members of Taseko and Yunesit’in (Stone) to discuss Project details and updates. Taseko met with TNG Chief and Council Chief Ivor Meyers of Yunesit’in (Stone), to discuss Prosperity Project updates (which included draining of Fish Lake [Option 3] and impact of the mine on wildlife). One meeting was held between Taseko, and Chiefs, Councilors and staff on November 9, 2007 to address the positive economic viability of the Project, the Rights and Title case, and what would be needed to move the Project forward. Taseko also provided an archaeological field visit to the Fish Lake Archaeology Field Site for TNG staff, band members, and 16 Elders.

Tl’esqox (Toosey) During the EA consultation process prior to 2000, Taseko staff members met with Chief Francis Lacesse of Tl’esqox (Toosey) four times between March 1993 and March 1995 to discuss the Declaration of the Chilcotin Nation, Memorandum of Understanding and to address specific concerns the Tl’esqox (Toosey) has with the Project. Taseko participated in two environmental workshops which addressed the Project and environmental studies. Thirty-four letters were exchanged between Taseko and Yunesit’in (Stone) from June 1993 and December 1995. Letters from Tl’esqox (Toosey) to Taseko requested written assurance that land designations can be changed when a treaty in concluded and expressed concern with Taseko consultation process. Letters from Taseko to Tl’esqox (Toosey) primarily confirmed meeting times and detailed contact between Tl’esqox (Toosey) and Taseko. After 2000, five meetings were held between members of Taseko and the Project Committee and Tl’esqox (Toosey) representatives to discuss Project details. The meetings occurred between June 26, 2006 and February 4, 2008 and primarily centered March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-72 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

on DFO policy and guidelines and the draining of Fish Lake. One meeting between Taseko and Tl’esqox (Toosey) focused on responsibility for the land, rights and titles cases, and certain project details. Two letters were exchanged between Taseko and Tl’esqox (Toosey) and TNG Chiefs addressing conditional reserve along proposed transmission corridor. Taseko made one telephone call on June 26, 2006 regarding project update.

2.5.4.2 Northern Secwepemc The following section provides a description of the consultation process with the Northern Secwepemc First Nations which includes the Northern Shuswap Tribal Council (formerly the Cariboo Tribal Council), Stswecem’c/Xgat’tem (Canoe Creek) T’exelcemc (Williams Lake), and Esketemc (Alkali). Xat’sull/Cmetem (Soda Creek) and Llenlleney’ten (High Bar) have only recently been engaged as directed by government in connection with the Project. The methods of communication included letters, meetings, informal meetings, treaty workshops, faxes, emails, reports, presentations, site tours, conferences, newsletters and telephone communications. A summary of consultation methods is provided below.

Northern Shuswap Tribal Council During the EA consultation process prior to 2000, Taseko met staff members of the NSTC (formerly CTC) two times between March 1996 and June 1996 to discuss how they should approach Stswecem’c/Xgat’tem (Canoe Creek). Taseko also attended three government sponsored workshops on treaty negotiations from September 1997 to June 1998. One letter was exchanged between heritage consultants and Taseko requesting the Native Ethnographic Study report by Cindy English if and when it is released.

Esketemc (Alkali) Between July 29, 1992 and February 3, 1999, consultation between Taseko and Esketemc (Alkali) Chief and Council, Tribal Councils, Elders, and individuals occurred that focused attention on the AIA Report, environmental and socio-economic impacts from the proposed transmission line corridor and assurance that land designations could be changed when a treaty is concluded as a result of a land claims negotiation process. Three meetings from July 1997 and October 1998 occurred between Taseko and members of Esketemc (Alkali) which addressed the impacts of the transmission line corridor and environmental impacts of the Project. Taseko attended two treaty negotiation workshops between February 1998 and June 1998. Two AIA Reports were sent to Chief William Chelsea between July 1992 and July 1995. The Assistant Deputy Minister, Mineral Resource Division, sent two letters to Chief William Chelsea of Esketemc (Alkali) providing written assurance of changing of land designations when treaties are concluded. In addition, Taseko received two letters regarding traditional land use and important hunting, fishing and trapping sites. During the EA consultation process post 2000, there were eight meetings occurred from June 2006 and August 2008 between Taseko and Chief and Council from Esketemc (Alkali). Four meetings focused on Prosperity Project updates and project details, employment and future work. Taseko provided a mine site tour of Gibraltar Mines on July 15, 2008 for people to see first-hand what happens in a mining operation. Taseko

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-73 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

staff also had a luncheon meeting in Williams Lake for Band Manager, Patricia Chelsea, with respect to the proposed transmission corridor. Taseko made a total of 21 phone calls to the Esketemc (Alkali) between May 2006 and April 2008. In attempts to discuss archaeology studies and First Nation engagement, Taseko staff made two phone calls and sent an email to Chief Patricia Chelsea of Esketemc (Alkali) to set up a TUS and archaeology meeting which was held on August 12, 2008. Twenty-four emails, one fax and six telephone calls made on behalf of Taseko regarding Traditional Use Studies and Taseko’s attempt to set up a meeting with Esketemc (Alkali) and TNG representatives to integrate TUS into the EA.

Stswecem'c/Xgat’tem (Canoe Creek) Between October 10, 1992 and February 5, 1999, consultation between Taseko and Stswecem’c (Canoe Creek) First Nations Chief and Council, Tribal Councils, Elders, and individuals occurred that focused attention on impacts from the transmission line corridor, assurance that the Fish Lake Heritage Study would not affect any future land claim, and a proposed helicopter tour over the proposed transmission line corridor. Twenty three letters were sent between October of 1992 and February of 1999. Three of these letters were assurance letters to Stswecem’c/Xgat’tem (Canoe Creek) that the Fish Lake Ethnographic Heritage Study would not be used to bias any future land claims. The Assistant Deputy Minister, Mineral Resource Division, sent two letters to Chief Agnes Snow of Stswecem’c/Xgat’tem (Canoe Creek) providing written assurance of changing of land designations when treaties are concluded. Taseko sent five letters, faxes and emails and held one meeting with Chief Agnes Snow of Stswecem’c/Xgat’tem (Canoe Creek) and Stswecem’c/Xgat’tem (Canoe Creek) staff regarding the helicopter tour of the proposed hydro line over the band’s traditional lands. Taseko also sent three AIA Reports to Stswecem’c/Xgat’tem (Canoe Creek) Chief and administration between October 1992 and July 1995. During EA consultation post-2000, Taseko staff met with Chief and Council and representatives from Stswecem’c/Xgat’tem (Canoe Creek) and NSTC seven times between July 2006 and March 2008 regarding Stswecem’c/Xgat’tem (Canoe Creek) involvement in the EA process and how to build the TUS into the EA. Informal meeting between Taseko and Stswecem’c/Xgat’tem (Canoe Creek) band administrator Dave Danyluk regarding TUS on December 11, 2007. A Community Prosperity Presentation was given by Taseko to Stswecem’c/Xgat’tem (Canoe Creek) Chief and Council and representatives from NSTC regarding Project components and their potential impact. Taseko made 31 telephone calls to Stswecem’c/Xgat’tem (Canoe Creek) representatives between May 2006 and May 2008 updating them of survey work, archaeology permits, and the TUS. These calls also include requests for Taseko to give presentations to Stswecem’c/Xgat’tem (Canoe Creek) First Nation and meeting requests, and to set up conference calls to discuss project scope.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-74 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

T'exelcemc (Williams Lake) Two meetings occurred between Taseko and Willie Alphonse of T'exelcemc (Williams Lake) between September 1993 and November 1995. These meetings focused on Memorandum of Understanding between First Nations and the MEMPR. During the EA consultation process post-2000, Taseko sent three emails and made two telephone calls to T'exelcemc (Williams Lake) Lake First Nation to request an opportunity to speak with Chief and Council to update them on the Project and discuss the EA, and TUS. A press release was issued in July 2008 by the Williams Lake Tribune regarding the TNG and T'exelcemc (Williams Lake) opinion on mining.

2.6 Identified First Nations Issues and Concerns Taseko began implementing their First Nation Engagement and Consultation Strategy in 1993, with the First Nation communities in closest proximity to the proposed Project mine site, access roads and transaction corridor, and transmission line. Since that time, descriptions of the meetings and concerns raised at the events were recorded. The Table of First Nations Engagement and Consultation for Prosperity (Appendix 8-2-A) identifies each meeting (or other contact) by date, location and attendees. This documentation has been a tool to record the First Nations issues with regard to the Project. In addition issues brought forward through contact with First Nations, issues or effects have also been identified through the EA assessment of Traditional Land Use and Traditional Knowledge (Volume 8, Section 2.4), First Nations Cultural Heritage (Volume 6, Section 3.3.5), Resource Use (Volume 6, Section 5) and Human Health (Volume 6, Section 6). From the above, key issues were identified based on the following criteria: • most frequently raised question or issue by individual First Nations and/or as a concern by First Nation Government • issue or effect identified through the Traditional Knowledge or Traditional Land Use research • issues arising from the First Nations meetings that the EA confirmed could potentially be First Nation effects • Taseko believed mitigation is required through effects identified through the EA assessment

2.6.1 Key Issues: Relationship to Aboriginal Rights The key issues evolved into three main categories: environmental, socio-economic and regulatory. It is useful to discuss at this point the relationship between the ‘issues’ identified here, and ‘aboriginal rights’ that are asserted or established. In preparing this Application/EIS, Taseko has assumed that a full range of aboriginal rights has been asserted by each of the 12 First Nations that are the focus of this application—except, of course, to the extent that those rights have actually been established. During the discussions with the First Nations leading up to the preparation of the Application, the focus tended to be on the identification of aboriginal “concerns”, as opposed to aboriginal “rights”. However, Taseko has also assumed that most of the aboriginal “concerns” relate to and flow from asserted aboriginal “rights”. For example, March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-75 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

when an aboriginal concern is raised about the possible impact that the Project might have on increasing the incidence of non-aboriginal people hunting in the area, Taseko has assumed that the expressed concern is founded on an asserted (or established) aboriginal right to hunt or trap in the area. Several things have led to Taseko characterizing the aboriginal concerns as ‘issues’ rather than ‘rights’ of individual First Nations. These include the following: 1. Many of the “concerns” were identified long before there was a focus on identifying them as “rights”—in fact many were identified in the 1990s. 2. The First Nations tended not to identify their concerns in the context of specific “rights”—rather, when the subject of interference with rights was raised it tended to be associated with a general assertion was that the Project might adversely impact on “aboriginal rights” or “aboriginal rights and title”, often in the context of a discussion of particular aboriginal concerns. 3. In October of 2008 letters were sent to 11 of the 12 First Nations (all except Xat’sull/Cmetem [Soda Creek]) which included a Table entitled “First Nations Concerns”. The purpose was so that the First Nations would be aware of the concerns that had been identified, and would have an opportunity to comment on them, and how they had been described. Follow up letters were sent to those First Nations in November. A separate letter was sent to Xat’sull/Cmetem (Soda Creek) in November (it was not clear that they would be included in the First Nations that might be affected by the Project). None of the First Nations expressed any objection to the description of the First Nations concerns, or the manner of describing them. 4. In those same letters of October and November requests were made to each of the First Nations for a map that would outline their claimed traditional territory. The only First Nation that actually provided a map of their claimed traditional territory that Taseko was authorized to use for the purposes of this Application was Xat’sull/Cmetem (Soda Creek). Therefore it was never made clear by the First Nations what aspects of the Project might actually have any effect on specific First Nations. Taseko concluded that the conservative and most appropriate approach would be to assume that a full range of aboriginal rights was being asserted by all First Nations, and that the impact on any such right should be assumed to impact on all First Nations. By a full range of aboriginal rights, Taseko means the following: aboriginal title, a right to fish, a right to hunt, a right to trap, a right to harvest wild plants, and a right to harvest trees. Taseko has already noted that the Tsilhqot’in people have already established certain rights in the Eastern Trapline Territory, which includes the area where the mine is proposed, and those established rights are to hunt and trap birds and animals, as well as trade in skins and pelts, for the purposes outlined in that decision (see William pp. iv, v) Each category below intends to outline those specific issues which appear to be of concern to the majority of First Nations in the regional study area, and or topics which have a potential impact upon the First Nations and their Governments. The order in which the key issues are listed in each category reflect the issues importance or those most often raised, and, where appropriate, the related aboriginal right is identified in brackets. As noted in the next section, the proposed mitigation is identified in the assessment tables that follow.

Environmental Issues • wildlife and access (right to hunt and trap) March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-76 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

• fish and fish habitat (right to fish) • water contamination (right to hunt, trap and fish) • air and dust contamination (right to hunt, trap, fish and harvest plants) • other hazards and nuisance effects (right to hunt and trap) • post-closure and reclamation

Socio-economic Issues • effects to first nation culture (aboriginal title, various rights) • long-term community benefits (aboriginal title) • employment and contracts • community funding • the role of unions in employment with First Nations

Regulatory Issues • government to government in consultation (aboriginal title, various rights) • sustainable long-term relationship with Taseko • panel review • engagement and consultation methodology

2.6.2 Project Effects and Mitigation An effects assessment table by key issue has been created to present each First Nations concern, the reference where the issue is addressed in the EA, and a response or commitment from Taseko. The tables provide direction to the reader to other sections of the EA where more information regarding the assessment of project effects on wildlife and wildlife habitat (Volume 5; Sections 5 and 6), fish and fish habitat (Volume 3, Section 8), air quality (Volume 4, Section 2), and traditional use (Volume 6, Section 3) are located. The following sections are intended to compile known First Nations issues and concerns into this one location of the EA, and, as taken from other sections of the EA, summarize the project effects, significance and mitigation measures. The tables are divided into three key issue categories: environmental issues, socio-economic issues, and regulatory issues.

2.6.2.1 Environmental Issues The following section identifies key concerns raised by First Nations based on environmental concerns.

Wildlife Wildlife preservation is a key environmental concern raised by the following First Nations in the RSA: TNG, Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah), Yunesit’in (Stone) and Tl’esqox (Toosey). Table 2-4 summarizes key environmental concerns identified by First Nations in respect to wildlife.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-77 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Table 2-4 Summary of Key Environmental Concerns by First Nations: Wildlife Concern Technical Report Response (1) Will dust and the air carry pollutants that will • Volume 4: Physical Environment, Section 2: • Air emissions from the Project are predicted to be relatively minor at the closest community (Nemiah Valley) which is be absorbed by: Atmospheric Environment the worst case scenario • the plants and be ingested by animals • Volume 5: Biotic Environment, Section 2: Water Quality • The Project is not anticipated to have an effect on water drinking water quality or be of concern to human health. and result in tainted home country and Aquatic Ecology • The effect of soil loading to wildlife through direct contact and ingestion, and subsequent human ingestion of such foods, a key source of protein in • Volume 6: Socio-Economics, Human Health and wildlife was evaluated for arsenic, chromium, and copper. Potential risk to humans from consumption of vegetation, traditional diets, and Ecological Risk Assessment, Section 6: Socio- willow ptarmigan, muskrat, and moose indicated that the health risk would be no different from baseline conditions, • enter the water systems? economics, Human Health and Ecological Risk even after 19 years of mining activity. Assessment • Monitoring will be conducted to confirm predictions and a number of mitigation measures for the protection of • Volume 5: Biotic Environment, Section 4: Terrain and atmospheric environment will be implemented. Soils. • An overview of the Air Quality and Noise Management Plan that will be implemented and the mitigation measures for • Volume 3, Section 9: Environmental Management minimizing dust is provided in Volume 3, Section 9. Program (2) Will there be a net loss of habitat for wildlife • Volume 6: Socio-Economics, Human Health and • Development of the mine site and TSF will result in the direct loss of harvesting of deer, moose, grouse and squirrel due to Project development and will the Ecological Risk Assessment, Section 5: Effects on around Fish Lake until post-closure. travel corridors for animals be potentially Resource Uses • Volume 5, Biotic Environment; Section 6 (Wildlife) addresses issues for the area potentially affected by the mine site, affected? • Volume 5: Biotic Environment, Section 6: Wildlife transmission line corridor and access road and includes a summary of the amount and type of wildlife habitat potentially • Volume 5: Biotic Environment, Section 5: Vegetation impacted by the development. and Wetlands • The largest loss of habitat area and the area of permanent habitat loss occurs in the mine site area; however, many • Volume 3, Section 9: Environmental Management species have widespread habitat regionally (e.g., moose, mule deer, black bear) and habitat values on the mine site Program increase post-closure. The Project effect on the grasslands, where the greatest species of conservation concern exist, is minimal. • The Fish Lake/Fish Creek area has not been specifically identified as a movement corridor for any of the key wildlife indicators. The transmission line will not restrict access for wildlife and as it is relatively narrow it will have minimal impact on wildlife movement. • Volume 3, Section 9 provides an overview of reclamation to wildlife habitat and use for key species. Detailed reclamation planning to restore acreages of wildlife habitat will be developed during the Mines Act permitting process. • Measures to minimize impacts on vegetation and habitats will be developed in the Vegetation and Wildlife Management Plan for which an overview is provided in Volume 3, Section 9. (3) Will the Project and its development • Volume 6, Section 5: • Taseko Mines Ltd. is prepared to work with it’s employees and contractors, regulatory agencies, and First Nations to increase local hunting, specifically by Effects on Resource Use design and implement appropriate mitigation measures, such as the no-hunting/ no-fishing policy for its employees and employees, and contractors who will come Volume 3, Section 9: Environmental Management contractors while they are on their work rotation as described in the Transportation and Access Management Plan in and live in the local area? Program. Volume 3, Section 9 (4) Will animals fall into the mine pit? Volume 3, Section 9: Environmental Management • With the proposed no-hunting zone encompassing the mine area such that wildlife are not chased to the edges of the Program (Water Management Plan; Reclamation and pit, an issue of wildlife falling into the pit is not anticipated. At post-closure and with the return of hunting to the area, the Decommissioning Plan). pit will be filled with water and the upper pit edge reclaimed, which will contribute to the improved long-term safety of the pit area for wildlife. (5) Will trappers be compensated for losses on • Volume 6: Section 5: • The Application identifies trapping and guiding territories affected by the Project, identifies potential impacts to hunting, the trap line as a result of the Project being Effects on Resource Use trapping and guiding opportunities in the immediate and adjacent areas and propose mitigation measures to reduce developed? and eliminate negative effects. • Two trap lines will be negatively impacted by the Project and Taseko is committed to working with both trappers on the issue of compensation.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-78 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Fish and Fish Habitat Fish and Fish Habitat preservation is a key environmental concern raised by the following First Nations in the RSA: TNG, Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah), Yunesit’in (Stone), and ?Esdilagh (Alexandria). Table 2–5 summarizes key environmental concerns identified by First Nations in respect to fish and fish habitat.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-79 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Table 2-5 Summary of Key Environmental Concerns by First Nations: Fish and Fish Habitat Concern Technical Report Response (1) What are the impacts to eliminating an entire lake (Fish • Volume 3, Section 8: Fish and Fish • The Project will result in the loss of Fish Lake and a loss of an area important to the Tsilhqot’in people. Lake) and how will the loss of this lake impact fish Habitat Compensation Plan • The habitat and fish at Fish Lake have not been identified as unique in the regional study area. Regardless, the genetics of habitat in the area? Quotes from the communities the fish stock will be preserved and fish will be out-planted as well as used to stock Prosperity Lake. include: “Fish Lake cannot be compensated for • The fish compensation plan provides for replacement fish habitat and angler opportunities in Prosperity Lake within 5 years because this unique lake has developed over of construction. thousands of years and could never be replaced”, and • Upon post-closure, the improved access to the area in combination with developing and maintaining a self- sustaining fish “No amount of money will compensate for the loss of population will likely lead to fish habitat and recreational fishing opportunities in the area that exceed pre-Project levels. fish in Fish Lake.” • The Fish and Fish Habitat Compensation Plan demonstrates that no net loss of productive capacity can be achieved and that plan measures are both technically and biologically feasible. (2) Is it really possible that fish living in the tailings ponds • Volume 5: Biotic Environment, Section • There are many examples of situations where fish living in both tailings and seepage ponds of existing mines are known to will be suitable for eating? 2: Water Quality and Aquatic Ecology be fit for human consumption (e.g. Trojan Pond at Highland Valley Copper, the seepage pond at Gibraltar). • Tissue testing of fish in tailings ponds at operating copper mines has been done, and metal accumulation in tissue does not affect suitability for consumption. • Monitoring of fish health and fish tissue will be conducted. (3) Potential chemical effects on the aquatic environment • Volume 5: Biotic Environment, Section • In Volume 6, Section 6, the assessment of human exposure to chemicals in drinking water focused on consumption of are not considered in The Human Health and 2: Water Quality and Aquatic Ecology; water from local surface water bodies by traditional and recreational users while in the area of the proposed mine site. Terrestrial Ecological Risk Assessment Volume 6 • Volume 6, Section 6: Human Health • During operations, there is no discharge of water from the mine site; however, post-closure concentrations of metals in Section 6. and Ecological Risk Assessment surface quality was modeled to assess future exposure to chemical hazards in drinking water. • During post-closure discharge from the Pit Lake and TSF, concentrations did not exceed drinking water quality guidelines in mixing zones in the Taseko River. As a result, the Project is not predicted to affect drinking water quality or the health of individuals that use this water. • Monitoring during operations and post-closure will be conducted to confirm predictions, and where predictions are not correct, corrective action will be taken. (4) Will the genetic line of existing trout population that • Volume 3: Project Description and • The proposed Fish Compensation Plan includes measures designed to ensure that the genetic line of the existing trout exists today be maintained and or successfully re- Scope of Project; Section 8: Fish population will be maintained. stocked during the mine post closure phase? Compensation plan (5) Could pollution from the mine effluent drainage system • Volume 5: Biotic Environment, Section • During operations, surface water will not be discharged from the site. Effects of clean water diversions around the site into devastate the salmon and sturgeon within the Chilko 2: Water Quality and Aquatic Ecology, Fish Creek, Wasp Lake and Beece Creek are predicted to be not significant for water quality and aquatic ecosystems. and Taseko Mines River system? and Section 3: Fish and Fish Habitat Seepage water, either directly discharged to the Taseko River or moving with groundwater to Big Onion Lake were modeled • Volume 3: Project Description and and the changes in water quality are predicted to be not significant. Scope of Project; Section 9: Water • Post-closure discharge of pit water to lower Fish Creek is predicted to result in moderate changes in water quality Management Plan throughout the lower reaches of the stream; however, changes in water quality of the Taseko River downstream of Fish Creek are predicted to be not significant. Monitoring of water quality and environmental effects, including fish health and fish tissue, will be initiated post-closure to confirm predictions once there are discharges from the site. (6) Based on a review of the William Case and knowledge • Volume 3: Project Description and • The cultural effects of the proposed project will be felt by the Xeni Gwet’in since they have been using the area relatively of the Project site, it is understood that a portion of the Scope of Project, Section 8: Fisheries continuously for the last 150 years; although it is noted that other, particularly the Yunesit’in, have also used the area for First Nations total annual fishing activities and catch Compensation Plan fishing. comes from the spring harvest of rainbow trout at Fish • A series of mitigation and compensation strategies are proposed to offset the fish population and angling losses of Fish Lake, though the bulk of their annual catch likely comes Lake. Strategies include developing a compensation lake (Prosperity Lake) in the watershed to provide for a self sustaining from salmon fishing. The loss of Fish Lake and its inlet trout population to maintain the genetic integrity of the Fish Lake population. and outlet spawning habitat and populations will • Opportunity for First Nation involvement in the implementation, monitoring and management of mitigation and eliminate this source and abundance of fish for First compensation activities, as well as participation in the fish culture activities for the life of the Project is proposed in the Fish Nation harvest during operations. and Fish Habitat EA section. This can provide education, employment, business and relationship benefits.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-80 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Water Contamination Potential water contamination is a key environmental concern raised by the following First Nations in the RSA: TNG, Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah), Tl’esqox (Toosey), ?Esdilagh (Alexandria) and Esketemc (Alkali). Table 2–6 summarizes key environmental concerns identified by First Nations in respect to water contamination.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-81 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Table 2-6 Summary of Key Environmental Concerns by First Nations: Water Contamination Concern Technical Report Response (1) How is groundwater/surface water interaction going • Volume 5: Biotic Environment, • The follow-up and monitoring programs for surface water and hydrogeology are designed to ensure the baseline conditions and to be monitored when the operation period of the Section 2: Water Quality and Aquatic ARD predictions were adequate. Long-term monitoring will include surface water, seepage and hydrogeologic data from a mine discontinues? How long after operation stops Ecology network of groundwater wells installed along the length of the west tailings embankment. will the monitoring continue? Given the mine is • Volume 3: Project Description and • Monitoring is expected to continue post-closure of the project until predictions are validated and results are satisfactory to proposed to have an approximate 20 year lifespan Scope of Project, Section 7: Acid regulatory agencies. and some materials are potentially acid generating, Rock Drainage and Metal Leaching , how long would it take to ensure there is no and Section 9: Environmental contamination of the creek? Management Program (2) Is it going to require water treatment and why? • Volume 5: Biotic Environment, • At post-closure (year 44) Taseko recognizes there is uncertainty inherent in the mass balance model used to predict pit water Section 2: Water Quality and Aquatic quality, but is confident that both the opportunity and the technology are available to address any exceedances of water quality Ecology guidelines adequately. If necessary, there are treatment options available that are feasible using current technology. The need for treatment will be assessed through monitoring programs during operations and closure to assess the actual geochemical performance of the Project (to calibrate the water quality prediction to site data) and during the 27 years required for the pit to fill. Data from these monitoring programs will remove a large amount of uncertainty contained in the current prediction about metal loads generated by the different waste sources. • Additional mitigations, such as treatment of groundwater than contains porewater seeping through the western embankment and moving toward Big Onion Lake, would need to be assessed based on monitoring programs and implemented if actual groundwater quality is not as good as the conservative predictions made. (3) How is ARD managed; what are risks if water levels • Volume 3: Project Description and • Mine material segregation and handling procedures are described in the Acid Rock Drainage and Metal Leaching section (Volume in pond drop after closure? Scope of Project, Section 7: Acid 3, Section 7), as well as in the Mine Materials Handling Environmental Management Plan and the conceptual Tailings Rock Drainage and Metal Leaching Impoundment Operating Plan (Volume 3, Section 9). and Section 9: Environmental • Water balances were completed in order to estimate the annual water surplus or deficit at the TSF. Annual site water balances Management Program were based on average precipitation conditions, for the year prior to start-up, the 20 years of operation, and post-closure. • Under extreme dry conditions, the results of the analysis indicate that there may be a requirement to divert a portion of flows from the catchment east of the headwater channel in order to maintain the necessary pond volume to facilitate continuous, uninterrupted operations. • Post-closure requirements will include an annual inspection of the TSF and an on-going evaluation of water quality, flow rates and instrumentation records to confirm design assumptions for closure. (4) Will toxic chemicals be used (i.e. Cyanide)? What • Volume 3: Project Description and • Since only one concentrate will be produced, gold will not be separated from copper and therefore cyanide will not be used. about Mercury and Arsenic? Scope of Project, Section 6: Mine Mercury and arsenic are not reagents used in the milling process. Plan and Section 9: Environmental • From construction through closure, the handling, storage and disposal of hazardous chemicals will be dictated by the Material Management Program Handling and Waste Management Plan for which an overview is provided in Volume 3, Section 9. (5) What are the effects on aquifers and springs? • Volume 4: Physical Environment • Predicted project effects on groundwater (aquifer) quantity are limited to the vicinities of the pit and the TSF where there will be • Section 4: Surface Water Hydrology permanent rises in groundwater elevations post-closure, and a nominal increase or decrease in groundwater base flow to the and Hydrogeology Taseko River, lower Fish Creek, Big Onion Lake, Little Onion Lake and Wasp Lake. (6) How will you prevent groundwater impacts? What • Volume 4: Physical Environment, • During operations, pit dewatering will result in groundwater elevations in the vicinity of the pit to be decreased. Post-closure, about blasting and the effects on the walls and the Section 4: Surface Water Hydrology groundwater elevations will be increased in the vicinity of the pit by channeling surface water from the TSF into the open pit to seepage loss from the pit? and Hydrogeology create a pit lake. • Volume 4, Section 4 describes the predicted containment of water, including groundwater, within the Fish Creek basin post- closure. (7) What about water discharge into the mine? • Volume 4: Physical Environment, • Runoff from the undisturbed TSF catchment will collect in the TSF throughout operations. Seepage and surface runoff from the Section 4: Surface Water Hydrology West Embankment, directed through toe drains and collection ditches, will be pumped back into the TSF. Groundwater and surface and Hydrogeology runoff into the Open Pit, including water from the vertical depressurization wells, will be diverted to the Water Collection Pond. All • Volume 3: Project Description and water from the Water Collection Pond will be recycled to the Plant Site process water pond, or pumped directly into the TSF Scope of Project; Section 9: Supernatant Pond. Environmental Management Program

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-82 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Air and Dust Contamination (Atmospheric Environment) Air and dust contamination is a key environmental concern raised by the following First Nations in the RSA: TNG. Table 2-7 summarizes key environmental concerns identified by First Nations in respect to air and dust contamination.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-83 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Table 2-7 Summary of Key Environmental Concerns by First Nations: Air and Dust Contamination Concern Technical Report Response (1) What impact will dust on soils have on • Volume 4: Physical Environment, Section 2: • As the area surrounding the Project is used for subsistence hunting and fishing, trapping, and recreation, and there is a medicinal plants, berries, and wildlife food Atmospheric Environment; community within 20 km of the site (Volume 6, Section 5), particular attention has been paid to potential risks posed to traditional sources? • Volume 6, Section 6: Human Health and and recreational users of the area. Ecological Risk Assessment • The Project is not anticipated to cause adverse effects to medicinal plants, berries, and wildlife food sources resulting from dust. • As described in Volume 6, Section 6, there is little predicted change in the final metal soil concentrations or water concentration in the LSA, and uptake to wild game and fish is expected to be negligible. • Risk predictions do not change from baseline to post-closure, thus effects of Project activities on the metal concentrations in country foods and fish are predicted to be not significant.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-84 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Other Hazards and Nuisance Effects Other hazards and nuisance effects are a key concern raised by the following First Nations in the RSA: Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah), Yunesit’in (Stone) and ?Esdilagh (Alexandria). Table 2-8 summarizes key environmental concerns identified by First Nations in respect to other hazards and nuisance effects.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-85 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Table 2-8 Summary of Key Environmental Concerns by First Nations: Other Hazards and Nuisance Effects Concern Technical Report Response (1) Concern that noise and lights will be seen and • Volume 4: Physical Environment, Section 3: • Noise mitigation measures are described in Volume 4, Section 3 as well as in the Air and Noise Environmental Management heard from Nemiah. Acoustic Environment Plan. With the absence of human dwelling within the LSA and along the proposed access road, the overall residual effect of • Volume 3: Project Description and Project the Project is predicted to be not significant. Traffic noise associated with Project-related vehicle traffic will result in Scope; Section 9: Environmental Management insignificant changes in existing acoustic environment along highway 20 the Taseko Lake and 4500 Roads. Program • Mitigation measures to address effects from artificial lighting will be considered during the permitting stage and the concerns incorporated into the design of the facilities. (2) Concern about hazards and risks such as the • Volume 3: Project Description and Project • Reclamation and decommissioning will be conducted in accordance with the Health, Safety and Reclamation Code for Mines open pit after closure to people and animals, Scope; Section 9: Reclamation and in British Columbia. At post-closure the pit will be filled with water and the upper pit edge reclaimed, which will contribute to contribution of the Project on global warming Decommissioning Plan, Geotechnical Stability the improved long-term safety of the pit area for wildlife and people. and impacts on glacial fields, effects on the Monitoring Plan, and Air and Noise • Natural environmental issues or events such as seismic activity have been considered in the design of the project. Dams Project and infrastructure from earthquakes. Environmental Management Plan have been designed according to Canadian Dam Association Guidelines. Movement monitoring is described in the • Volume 5: Biotic Environment Geotechnical Stability Monitoring Plan in Volume 3, Section 9. • Volume 4: Physical Environment; Section 2: • The science of climate change has not been advanced to the point where a clear cause and effect relationship can be Atmospheric Environment established between specific or even provincial and national emissions, and subtle changes in global climate. As such, the incremental contribution of GHG emissions from the Project cannot be linked to specific changes in global climate or local glaciers. Although the Project effects on climate are assumed to be not significant, mitigative measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions that will be implemented are provided in the overview of the Air and Noise EMP. Management Plan.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-86 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Increased Access Increased access is a key concern raised by the following First Nations in the RSA: TNG, Esketemc (Alkali) and Stswecem’c/Xgat’tem (Canoe Creek). Table 2-9 summarizes key environmental concerns identified by First Nations in respect to increased access.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-87 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Table 2-9 Summary of Key Environmental Concerns by First Nations: Increased Access Concern Technical Report Response (1) Concern raised by Esketemc (Alkali) and Stswecem’c/ • Volume 5: Biotic Environment, Section 6: Wildlife • Throughout the Project area, and particularly on the transmission corridor, temporary access roads will be Xgat’tem (Canoe Creek) that the transmission corridor • Volume 6: Socio-Economics, Human Health and deactivated in such a manner so as to deter ATV travel. will result in increased access to hunting and trapping Ecological Risk Assessment, Section 5: Effects on • There may be issues around increased access resulting in disturbance of cultural sites, wildlife and wildlife territories impacting wildlife populations, and increased Resource Uses habitat. As part of the permitting process and consultation, Taseko will work with Ministry of Forests and access to important fishing sites. • Volume 3: Project Description and Project Scope; Range, First Nations and Ministry of Environment as the Ministries develop a public access plan to protect TNG is concerned that non-Aboriginal people will have Section 9: Environmental Management Program wildlife and heritage values. new access to hunting areas. (Vegetation and Wildlife EMP, and Transportation and Access EMP) (3) Concern from TNG and Esketemc (Alkali) that power into • Volume 6: Socio-Economics, Human Health and • Taseko Mines plans to remove the transmission line and reclaim the transmission line corridor following the region from the transmission corridor will result in Ecological Risk Assessment, Section 2: Economic permanent closure of the mine. further settlement. Issues

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-88 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Post-closure and Reclamation Post closure and reclamation is a key concern raised by the following First Nations in the RSA: Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah) and Yunesit’in (Stone). Table 2-10 summarizes key environmental concerns identified by First Nations in respect to post-closure and reclamation.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-89 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Table 2-10 Summary of Key Environmental Concerns by First Nations: Post closure and Reclamation Concern Technical Report Response (1) Reclamation is not clearly explained or reclamation is • Volume 3: Project Description and Scope of Project, • The detailed Reclamation and Decommissioning Plan that will be developed as part of the BC Mines Act not as successful as described. Question asked, “What Section 6: Mine Plan permitting process will be developed in accordance with the Health, Safety and Reclamation Code for Mines in does reclamation success look like at other mines?” British Columbia. A conceptual Reclamation and Decommissioning Plan is presented in Volume 3, Section 6. • Efforts will continue to be made to communicate the general practices and goals of reclamation. Mine tours at Gibraltar Mine have in the past, and will continue in the future, to include visits to reclaimed sites to enable participants to inspect results and discuss reclamation success. (2) TNG has viewed Option 3 (draining of Fish Lake) and • Volume 2, Section 6: Project Planning and • The details of the assessment of alternatives and conclusions in 1998 together with the findings of the 2008 has determined it as the worst option for the Tsilhqot’in. Alternatives Assessment update are presented in Volume 2, Section 6. TNG’s position is to try to save the lake and • Volume 3: Project Description and Scope of Project, • The proposed mine plan which requires the draining of Fish Lake is the only economically feasible option for surrounding ecosystems. Section 6: Mine Plan mine development. (3) TNG Chiefs will not accept the tailing pond to be • Volume 2, Section 6: Project Planning and • See above. located above the lake as there will be disturbance to Alternatives Assessment • Different tailing pond locations were considered in the alternatives assessment. the lake’s ecosystem. • Volume 3: Project Description and Scope of Project, Section 6: Mine Plan (4) Criticism from TNG that multiple accounts analysis did • Volume 2, Section 6: Project Planning and • The proposed mine plan is the only economically feasible option for mine development. not take into indicators for environmental, social or Alternatives Assessment cultural values into account, nor provide for monitoring to determine success. (5) TNG made request that Taseko Mines re-do the • Volume 2, Section 6: Project Planning and • See above. multiple accounts analysis and include them as Alternatives Assessment participants.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-90 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

2.6.2.2 Socio-economic Issues The following section identifies key concerns raised by First Nations based on socio-economic concerns.

Archaeological and Heritage Resources Archaeological and Heritage Resources is a key socio-economic concern raised by the following First Nations in the RSA: TNG, Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah), Yunesit’in (Stone), Tl’esqox (Toosey) and Stswecem’c/Xgat’tem (Canoe Creek). Table 2-11 summarizes key socio-economic concerns identified by First Nations in respect to archaeological and heritage resources.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-91 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Table 2-11 Summary of Key Socio-economic Concerns by First Nations: Archaeological and Heritage Resources Concern Technical Report Response (1) Concern was raised from Elders who were generally not • Volume 8: First Nations • The loss of Fish lake and disturbances within the mine footprint will result in the loss of an area that has accepting of the Project. Quotes regarding Elders • Volume 4: Biotic Environment; Section 6: Wildlife important cultural meaning for many Tsilhqot’in people. perspectives state that Prosperity is “destructive to the land • Volume 3: Project Description and Project Scope; Section 9: • Volume 8 describes each First Nation that has an interest in the Project and includes the results of best and the animals; they don’t want to see the mine go in.” Reclamation and Decommissioning Plan efforts to indicate where the Project may intersect or overlap traditional territories. First Nations described themselves as “caretakers of the • Volume 4, Section 6 describes effects on wildlife and mitigative measures for minimizing impacts and Volume land; that they have a duty to their ancestors who fought for 3, Section 8 describes the Fish Compensation Plan. this land to protect it; that they are connected to the land.” • The conceptual Reclamation and Decommissioning Plan in Volume 3, Section 9 illustrates general practices The land is their most precious asset and “destroying it is for soil salvage, soil replacement and revegetation to re-establish wildlife habitat values on the land following not something they will entertain. mining. (2) Collection and distribution of First Nations cultural, burial • Volume 7, Section 2: Archaeological and Heritage Resources • The mine site and transmission corridor have archaeological and cultural heritage values for both the and other archaeological sites is a concern. Distribution Tsilhqot’in and the Upper Secwepemc. and use of this type of information must be done through • The Archaeological Impact Assessments were completed in accordance with Section 3.5 of the British confidentiality agreements. Have sites been identified, and Columbia Archaeological Impact Assessment Guidelines. if so, have they been presented to First Nation • Taseko Mines intends to discuss the results of completed Archaeological Impact Assessments with First communities? Nations at an appropriate time. (3) Concern was expressed about cremation sites on the • Volume 7; Section 2: Archaeological and Heritage Resources • As stated above. island in the middle of Fish Lake as it will be displaced. (4) The displacement of Fish Lake will result in the loss of a • Volume 7; Section 2: Archaeological and Heritage • As stated above. heritage site and archaeological burial ground. Elders from Resources, Volume 8: First Nations, Section 3. Xeni Gwet’in (Nemiah) and Yunesit’in (Stone) have concerns regarding traditional knowledge and ancestors’ homestead sites. (5) Esketemc (Alkali) considers the Fraser River to have an 8 • Volume 3: Project Description and Scope of Project, Section • The transmission corridor will cross the Fraser River. An Archaeological Impact Assessment will be km wide corridor running on both sides to be protected. 6: Mine Plan. conducted for the proposed areas of disturbance along the transmission corridor prior to construction in accordance with Section 3.5 of the British Columbia Archaeological Impact Assessment Guidelines. (6) Concern that traditional knowledge areas will be potentially • Volume 8: First Nations • Taseko has been, and will continue to be, open to full engagement and consultation with First Nation affected by the corridor. communities regarding their Aboriginal and community interests. Any known sensitive sites can be incorporated into the final centerline of the transmission corridor for avoidance during construction. (7) Yunesit’in (Stone) declined participation in the Elders visit • Issues concerning participation in field visits are not specifically addressed in the Application of Fish Lake. (8) Questions raised regarding medicinal food and wildlife, and • Volume 4: Physical Environment, Section 2: Atmospheric • The effect of soil loading to wildlife through direct contact and ingestion, and subsequent human ingestion of if it will be infected. Requests were made for fenced areas. Environment such wildlife was evaluated for arsenic, chromium, and copper. Potential risk to humans from consumption of • Volume 5: Biotic Environment, Section 2: Water Quality and vegetation, willow ptarmigan, muskrat, and moose indicated that the health risk would be no different from Aquatic Ecology baseline conditions, even after 19 years of mining activity. • Volume 6: Socio-Economics, Human Health and Ecological • A number of mitigation measures for the protection of atmospheric environment will be implemented as part of Risk Assessment, Section 6: Socio-economics, Human the Project to ensure compliance with Provincial and Federal air quality Objectives and Standards throughout Health and Ecological Risk Assessment the construction, operation, and closure phases of the Project are described fully in Volume 4, Section 2. • Volume 5: Biotic Environment, Section 4: Terrain and Soils. • An overview of the Air Quality and Noise Management Plan that will be implemented and include mitigation • Volume 3, Section 9: Environmental Management Program measures for minimizing the impact of dust is provided in Volume 3, Section 9. (9) The lack of access is going to impact the traditional way of • The loss of Fish Lake and disturbances within the mine footprint will results in a loss of access to an area that life. has cultural meaning for many Tsilhqot’in people. (10) Concern expressed that much of the TUS information is • Volume 8: First Nations, Section 2: Engagement and • Volume 8 includes traditional knowledge gathered from existing, publically available sources. confidential and it will have to be scrutinized prior to Consultation publishing. It was requested that TNG gather the information for the consultants rather than have the consultants gather information on First Nations. (11) Any infringement on the rights of First Nations is a serious • A discussion on infringement of rights is not specifically included in the Terms of Reference issue and any impact on the Taseko River will be regarded as an infringement on First Nation rights.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-92 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Socio-economic Socio-economic concerns were raised by the following First Nations in the RSA: TNG, Yunesit’in (Stone) and Esketemc (Alkali). Table 2-12 summarizes key socio-economic concerns identified by First Nations in respect to socio-economic concern.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-93 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Table 2-12 Summary of Key Socio-economic Concerns by First Nations: Socio-economic Concern Technical Report Response (1) Concern that the Mine will have social impacts on Tsilhqot’in • Volume 6: Socio-Economics, Human • Both the positive and negative economic and social effects of the project on individuals, organizations, people. Health and Ecological Risk Assessment communities and governments are measured and reported in Volume 6. Economic effects considered include What affects will the mine have on people’s lives and the impacts on employment and labour markets, income, infrastructure capacity, government finances and on community? economic and regional development. Social effects considered include impacts on population growth, social What about increased drug and alcohol abuse and higher crime characteristics, housing and accommodation, social services, traffic and transportation and community due to money from the mine in the community? infrastructure. (2) Members need to be assured of long-term community benefits and • Volume 8: First Nations • Taseko recognizes the issue of community sustainability. environment protection for them to approve of development on • Commitments from Taseko regarding Community Interests and Benefits are described in Section 2.8 of their land, not short term jobs for individuals that just change their Volume 8. way of life. (3) What are the jobs and education requirements? There is concern • Volume 8: First Nations • Taseko’s Mining: Your Future education and training program and hiring procedures are outline in Section 2.8 regarding the high unemployment rate (80%). of Volume 8. (4) Questions raised at how to assess the Project in context of • Volume 8: First Nations • Taseko’s willingness to support local business initiatives that benefit both the local community and the Project emerging tourism strategy being developed with First Nations. are identified in Section 2.8 of Volume 8. (5) Union issues were raised and questions were asked regarding • Volume 8: First Nations • Taseko’s Mining: Your Future education and training program and hiring procedures are outline in Section what employment will be available for First Nations? Concern was 2.8 of Volume 8. raised that the favourable jobs would go to non-local residents. (6) A statement was made that Taseko Mines needs to control • Volume 3: Project Description and Project • Taseko Mines Ltd. is prepared to work with it’s employees and contractors, regulatory agencies, and First employees’ onsite to stop them from going offsite and impacting Scope; Section 9: Transportation and Nations to design and implement appropriate mitigation measures, such as the no-hunting/ no-fishing policy wildlife. Access Management Plan for its employees and contractors while they are on their work rotation as described in the Transportation and Access Management Plan in Volume 3, Section 9

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-94 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Financial Financial concern is a key concern raised by the following First Nations in the RSA: TNG, Esketemc (Alkali), Stswecem’c/Xgat’tem (Canoe Creek) and Tsi Del Del (Alexis Creek). Table 2-13 summarizes key socio-economic concerns identified by First Nations in respect to financial concern.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-95 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Table 2-13 Summary of Key Socio-economic Concerns by First Nations: Financial Concern Technical Report Response (1) There is a lack of ownership, poverty, inadequate education, and government fiscal • Volume 8: First Nations • Taseko Mines intends to fully consider the interests, needs and ambitions of local and control of First Nation spending. First Nations are interested in revenue sharing. First Nations communities in all aspects of the work proposed as part of the Project. • Taseko’s Mining: Your Future education and training program and hiring procedures are outline in Section 2.8 of Volume 8. • Revenue sharing with the Province is not specifically addressed in the Application. (2) TNG wants tax revenues. Some First Nations compared the conditions in their • Sharing mineral or corporate taxes with the Province are not specifically addressed in the community to third world conditions. TNG wants Taseko Mines to listen to the people. Application. Since Project structures would be located on traditional territory, Taseko Mines should pay rent to First Nations. Money should not go to government as it is TNG country. Taxes should go to First Nations since resources belong 100% to the Chilcotin people. (3) In regard to royalties, they should go to other businesses that continue on after the • Sharing of mineral or corporate taxes with the Province are not specifically addressed in operation of the mine so that grandchildren will benefit. If the Project proceeds, it will be the Application. locally run with full-time local input when it opens and closes. (4) If the Project proceeds, requests were made for training so that First Nations could • Volume 8 • Taseko’s Mining: Your Future education and training program and hiring procedures are obtain non-operating jobs. outline in Section 2.8 of Volume 8. (5) What will the revenue be for First Nations? • Revenue sharing with the Province is not specifically addressed in the Application.

(6) “What is the feasibility of the Project and effect of the increasing Canadian dollar? What • Volume 3: Project Description and Project • The Application includes an accounting of the defined mineral resource, grades, NSR will the return be on the investment? Will it be the largest mine in British Columbia? What Scope; Section 6: Mine Plan and Section cut-off metal prices and exchange rates used in the feasibility studies undertaken. are the possibilities of having to shut the mine down because of low metal prices in the 9: Reclamation and Decommissioning Plan • The conceptual Reclamation and Decommissioning Plan includes a discussion of future and the implications of such? activities necessary if the mine pre-maturely closes. What would happen if the mine had to re-open? Does the mine have to be big to be economical?

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-96 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

2.6.2.3 Regulatory Issues The following section identifies key concerns raised by First Nations based on Regulatory Issues.

EA Process and Panel Review EA process and panel review concerns are a key regulatory concern raised by the following First Nations in the RSA: TNG and Stswecem’c/Xgat’tem (Canoe Creek). Table 2-14 summarizes key regulatory concerns identified by First Nations in respect to EA process and panel review.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-97 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Table 2-14 Summary of Key Regulatory Issues Concerns by First Nations: EA Process Concern Technical Report Response (1) TNG expressed concern that there is currently, no formal process in place for • Volume 8: First Nations • Issues concerning accommodation are not specifically addressed in the Application government to address accommodation process following the EA review. They feel the • Information sharing and consultation to date, as well as a Long Term First Nations Consultation Strategy, is first step of consultation is for First Nations to review the EA then make presented in Volume 8. recommendations and hold discussion on compensation (IBA) with the Proponent and accommodation terms with the government. TNG wants to have a consultation, compensation and accommodation process in place before moving forward. (2) Concern was raised by Stswecem’c/ Xgat’tem (Canoe Creek) that the Provincial • Volume 8: First Nations • Information sharing and consultation to date, as well as a post-filing consultation strategy, is presented in Government has never contacted their community. Volume 8.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-98 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Consultation Consultation concerns were raised by the following First Nations in the RSA: TNG, Yunesit’in (Stone), Tl’esqox (Toosey), Tl’etinqox-t’in (Anaham), Esketemc (Alkali) and Stswecem’c/ Xgat’tem (Canoe Creek). Table 2-15 summarizes key socio-economic concerns identified by First Nations in respect to consultation concern.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-99 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Table 2-15 Summary of Key Socio-economic Concerns by First Nations: Consultation Concern Technical Report Response (1) Concern from Tl’etinqox-t’in (Anaham) Elders that they are being left out of the consultation • Volume 8: First Nations • Information sharing and consultation to date, as well as a post-filing consultation strategy, is presented process and that money is going only to TNG. in Volume 8. • Costs for participating in the consultation process are not specifically addressed in the Application. (2) Esketemc (Alkali) expressed interest in participating in the Project but requests that costs be • Volume 8: First Nations • Information sharing and consultation to date, as well as a post-filing consultation strategy, is presented covered for Elder’s time. in Volume 8. • Costs for participating in the consultation process are not specifically addressed in the Application. (3) Stswecem’c/ Xgat’tem (Canoe Creek) is concerned they are not being consulted by the • First Nations consultation with the Province is not specifically addressed in the Application. province and requested that costs be covered for participating. (4) Yunesit’in (Stone) stated that Taseko Mines needs to improve their understanding and • Volume 8: First Nations • Taseko has been, and will continue to be, open to full engagement and consultation with First Nation conditions in the community. communities regarding their Aboriginal and community interests. (5) TNG expressed concern that they have a lack of access to information and lack capacity to • Volume 8: First Nations • Issues concerning capacity to participate are of interest to Taseko and we are willing to work with provide effective input to the Working Group Meetings. They requested to be effectively government and First Nations to address them. involved in a detailed work plan review. (6) The TNG do not want to be put into the position of having to make a quick decision • This issue is not specifically addressed in the Application. regarding the Project. (7) TNG stated that it would be of value for Taseko Mines to work with the community members • Volume 8: First Nations • A long-term First Nation Engagement and Consultation Strategy is outlined in Volume 8. and hear their concerns directly. Community members, not the Chiefs, will be the decision makers and their concerns must be addressed or they will vote “no.” (8) TNG stated that for further meetings to occur, legal council will need to be present to protect • This issue is not specifically addressed in the Application. Rights and Title case. (9) Tl’esqox (Toosey) are concerned that they have little experience working with mining • This issue is not specifically addressed in the Application. companies. (10) TNG stated that First Nation people need to see what the “whole picture” of the mine and • Volume 8: First Nations • A long-term First Nation Engagement and Consultation Strategy is outlined in Volume 8. what it will look like, during the operation and decommissioning stage. They asked what the closure plan looks like and asked what they long-term health and quality of life issues and outcome they can expect.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-100 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

2.7 Community Interest and Benefits

2.7.1 Introduction Taseko has been, and will continue to be, open to full engagement and consultation with First Nation communities regarding their Aboriginal and community interests and to the discussion of ideas on how the Project can best reflect and contribute to the advancement of their interests and ideas through the construction, operations and closure of the Prosperity Mine. This section provides an overview of Taseko’s commitments to local and regional communities, including a new education and training initiative Mining: Your Future.

2.7.2 Taseko Mines Overarching Commitments to the People in Local and Regional Study Area The following is Taseko’s stated commitments to their operations providing fair, healthy and safe employment and business opportunities to all people of the local and regional study area:

Human Resources Taseko is committed to having an employment environment that is supportive and that demonstrates the value that we place on teamwork and individual contributions. Taseko expects all of their employees to treat their fellow employees with the courtesy, dignity and respect that they would like to receive. An integral part of that policy is that the Company does not practice or permit discrimination against any person because of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, age or disability. Taseko is committed to having a friendly workplace that is free of harassment, intimidation and hostility. Taseko is committed to treating all of our employees fairly. To that end, Taseko encourages their employees to confer with the appropriate person if they have employment related issues that they believe should be addressed. Taseko wants to be known as the employer of choice in every community in which we operate.

Health and Safety Taseko is committed to having work sites that are safe and healthy. Taseko expects all of their employees to comply with all applicable health and safety requirements and policies. In addition to meeting or exceeding all industry standards and legislative requirements, Taseko expects all of their employees to use common sense in matters involving health and safety. Taseko provides employees with the information and training necessary for them to perform their work safety and efficiently. For all employees of Taseko, it is imperative to remember that there is no job which is so urgent that we cannot take the time to do it safely.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-101 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Environment Taseko is committed to continual improvement in the protection of human health and stewardship of the natural environment. Environmental policies, programs, and practices will be integrated into all activities. Taseko is committed to complying with relevant environmental legislation, regulations, and corporate requirements. To this end, we will ensure that all employees understand their environmental responsibilities and encourage dialogue on environmental issues.

First Nations Taseko recognizes and has appreciation for the rich histories, cultures, traditions, languages and values of British Columbia’s First Nations people. The First Nations of British Columbia have a unique and distinct status in our province and Taseko acknowledges and respects their assertion of traditional rights and title. Taseko understands the value of developing strong, long lasting relationships with local communities that are affected by, or that affect, the Company’s various endeavours. Accordingly, Taseko is committed to working with First Nation peoples and their governments in a manner consistent with the following principles: • maintain an atmosphere of early, open, and full communication with First Nations on Company projects and programs in their traditional territories • recognize the value and significance of traditional, cultural and heritage knowledge and interest • develop mutually beneficial partnerships with our First Nation neighbours • work with First Nation Governments to encourage the formation and development of locally owned businesses • present opportunities for employment, training, and career advancement • continual improvement in the protection of human health and responsible stewardship of the natural environment

Community and Stakeholders Taseko is committed to maintaining the best possible relationships with the communities in which we operate. Taseko remembers that, in many instances, they are guests in the community and that if and when they eventually leave the community and its members will remain in place. Taseko recognizes that if it is to be welcomed in other communities in the future, it is imperative that they leave a legacy of good will in those places where we have conducted business in the past. The Company's policy is to make positive contributions to the communities in which they operate, including encouragement of local employment in their operations and financial contributions to an appropriate extent, so that the community is enriched by its presence. Taseko also encourages all of their employees to participate in community activity. Taseko’s suppliers and customers are critical to their success in many ways. Taseko is committed to maintaining honest and mutually beneficial relationships with their suppliers and customers. Taseko expects to be treated fairly by their suppliers and customers, and their suppliers and customers are entitled to the same treatment from

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-102 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

Taseko. Taseko’s reputation for fair dealing will serve to benefit them whenever and wherever they engage in business. Taseko’s employees make the Company in many ways. Taseko recognizes their participation and importance through our commitments to Human Resources and Health and Safety. Taseko’s shareholders are their most important stakeholders. As the owners of the Company, they have entrusted Taseko employees with the care of their assets, and they rely on them to manage those assets responsibly, with a view to providing the shareholders with a suitable return on their investment. Taseko is committed to managing their assets responsibly and to providing the shareholders with timely and complete disclosure.

Ethical Conduct and Compliance with Law Taseko is committed to conducting their business in an ethical way and in compliance with applicable laws and regulations. As a part of Taseko’s commitment, they have established a Code of Ethics and Trading Restrictions. The Code of Ethics contains some specific provisions dealing with such matters as corporate opportunity, conflicts of interest, and securities trading. It also deals with more general matters, such as compliance with law and honesty and fair dealing. The Company strives to operate in an ethical and legal way in all of its activities, and expects the same from its employees.

2.7.3 Taseko Commitments to Local First Nations Individuals and Communities for Opportunity and Benefit Community Interest and Benefits are based on Taseko’s commitment to ensure that the communities within the regional study area of the Prosperity Mine benefit from the development in the local study area including: • Employment and Contract Opportunities through • direct employment • contract opportunities independent and or with suppliers • construction jobs hired directly or with contractors • Education and Training by • investing locally in education, training and development initiatives • carrying out a new initiative program developed for mining education and training It is the philosophy of Taseko that working in a positive and responsible manner with local communities will provide the maximum mutual benefit. In order to be consistent and to build long term relationships it is important to establish Principles and Guidelines at the outset of the project for directing the way Taseko intends to do business long into the future.

Direct Employment Taseko’s hiring practices shall be consistent with the goal of delivering maximum economic value and social benefit—locally, regionally and provincially. Creating a safe, March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-103 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

healthy and productive work environment is a top priority. Taseko’s success will be highly dependent on those working on site and their ability to conduct their responsibilities with care and efficiency. Taseko’s first preference is to hire locally. A local employment candidate shall be defined as someone who lives in the Cariboo-Chilcotin region. A special effort will be made to hire local First Nation candidates by ensuring employment opportunities are communicated. We will undertake to inform local communities of the employment positions and opportunities available at Prosperity before expanding the search for potential employees beyond the Cariboo-Chilcotin region. Since candidates will be required to meet certain standards commensurate with the employment position in order to be successful, efforts will be made to ensure local people with motivation have the opportunity for training to be eligible for hiring and career advancement (see Training below). If two candidates with similar qualifications seek employment at Prosperity, but there is only one position available, the local candidate will be given preference. Taseko will encourage our suppliers, contractors, and consultants to do the same. Whatever the area of activity and whatever the degree of responsibility, employees are expected to act in a manner that will enhance TKO’s reputation for honesty, integrity and the faithful performance of undertakings and obligations.

Contracting for Suppliers or Services In the procurement of goods and services to build and operate the mine, Taseko’s decisions will be guided by their desire to deliver maximum economic value and social benefit—locally, regionally and provincially. Taseko believes that their success as a company is tied to the success of the local communities in which they invest and operate. Taseko cultivates an entrepreneurial spirit which is reflected in their procurement practices. Their approach is to develop lasting relationships with suppliers based on cost competitiveness, continuous innovation, service and productivity improvement, employee health and safety, and environment protection. Taseko will work with First Nations to encourage the formation and development of locally owned businesses that provide supplies or services to Prosperity. Taseko expects their contractors to share their commitment to investing in local community success through their respective purchasing, hiring, contracting and logistical support practices.

Training A properly qualified and trained workforce is essential to a safe and productive workplace. The health, safety and productivity of workers is linked to the care and conduct exercised by fellow employees. The more training and experience an employee gains, the greater their degree of care, safe conduct and efficiency in their performance. Taseko recognizes that not all First Nation individuals who are eager to work will have the experience or the qualifications necessary to work. To underscore the company’s commitment to maximize local benefits and give first preference to local hires, Taseko will set in place policies to help potential candidates gain required qualifications. Furthermore, through Mining: Your Future, Taseko’s education and training initiative,

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-104 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

the company will ensure that motivated individuals have the opportunity for further training for career advancement. The goal of Mining: Your Future is to help qualify locals to work at Taseko’s operations. Mining: Your Future will: • assist the company in meeting its current and future employment needs • help address the projected shortage of local skilled workers that Taseko will need in the coming years • create local awareness of opportunities and skill requirements in the mining industry • demonstrate corporate commitment to maximizing local employment opportunity Specific targets and tasks of Mining: Your Future include: • Increase the hiring of local people in all departments at Taseko’s operations without compromising their need to hire the best available talent. • Increase the number of high school graduates in the region to move on to formal education and training for a career in mining to specifically fill employment needs at Taseko’s operations. • Elevate college-level student interest in mining by increasing the focus on mining at the local colleges. • Increase local college and high school career counselors’ awareness of the specific career areas that are challenging for the mining industry to fill, such as instrumentation, heavy duty mechanics, engineering. Mining: Your Future is an education and training program for all people of the Cariboo- Chilcotin; however, special effort will be made to communicate the opportunities through this program to First Nations communities and individuals. This effort can result in a significant benefit to both Taseko and First Nations communities since there are 14 aboriginal communities located in the Cariboo-Chilcotin within 300 km of the Prosperity site. Taseko believes that, following training, there is a higher likelihood of aboriginal people staying within the region to work and raise families in contrast to non-aboriginal people who statistically are more mobile from community to community or Province to Province. Taseko is committed to ensure that First Nations youth be made aware of opportunities in their operations. The education and training program will be communicated by: • conducting evening presentations in rural and First Nations communities for students, parents and interested individuals • making presentations in community schools • communicating to the youth profiles of other Mining: Your Future participants currently taking training and those that have completed training successfully and are now working • creating a Mining: Your Future website that will include job descriptions and education requirements • advertising Mining: Your Future open houses and events in the local and community newspapers and radio

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-105 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

• providing a career counsellor to work with individuals on a one-on-one basis to formulate a training and career strategy, research all sources of funding • meeting regularly with First Nations leadership, economic development personnel and education administrators

2.7.4 Taseko’s Long-term First Nation Engagement and Consultation Strategy Over the many years leading up to the submission of the Application, Taseko has undertaken extensive consultation with First Nations. The purposes of this consultation has been to seek to develop a working relationship with the First Nations; to identify potential opportunities for mutual benefit; to identify aboriginal concerns and consider options to mitigate or accommodate those concerns; and, to perform certain procedural aspects of the Crown’s duty to consult. Taseko intends to continue those efforts during the application review phase of the environmental assessment process, and as appropriate, beyond that phase. Taseko hopes to be guided in its consultation efforts during the application review phase by input from both the Crown and the First Nations. It is Taseko’s intent to work closely and cooperatively with participating First Nations throughout the application review phase to ensure that potential project-related impacts on identified interests are appropriately addressed. Ongoing involvement and input from First Nations throughout the application review phase will be encouraged, facilitated and supported by the Company through the provision of Project-related information as well as in-house expertise to explain that information. All relevant input arising from the consultation process will be incorporated into project planning as appropriate. The nature of the consultation process for each First Nation will likely be determined to a considerable degree by the interest and willingness of that First Nation to participate in consultation with Taseko.

Approach: • Taseko will seek suggestions from the First Nations as to how Taseko may be able to make the consultation process during the Application review phase more meaningful for their community. • Taseko will respond promptly to all First Nation suggestions on how the consultation can be made more meaningful to their communities. • Taseko will be open to any reasonable suggestion on how First Nations, individually or collectively, wish to engage in discussions and consultations. • Taseko will be available to answer any specific written or oral questions from First Nations relating to the Project, and will make appropriate people available to attend at First Nation communities if that is their wish to provide presentations on the Application and on the Project, and to answer questions that may arise in the community.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-106 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

• Taseko will work closely with the Crown and carry out any reasonable requests of the Crown with respect to consultation.

Specifically Taseko Will • Seek to engage identified First Nations in a manner that meets the spirit, intent and formal requirements of the CEAA, BCEAA and the relevant policies of the BC EAO and the CEA Agency. • Provide copies of the Application and facilitate access to any relevant and reasonably available supporting documentation/studies that may be of interest to specific First Nations. • Take reasonable steps to keep the First Nations informed in relation to the scope, potential impacts, timing and progress of the Project. • Encourage and facilitate the ongoing participation of the First Nations in the Environmental Assessment. • Make appropriate in-house technical expertise available to First Nations to explain technical or other information, and inform the First Nations that such expertise or assistance is available if it would be of assistance to them. • Seek First Nations’ input through whatever form of communications, meetings or other forms of information sharing is appropriate to the particular First Nations to reasonably address any concerns regarding the potential for Project-related impacts on their interests. • Continue to work with individual First Nations to assist in: • clarifying Project-related scope and delivery issues • further identifying concerns or the potential for Project-related impacts on the First Nations identified Aboriginal interests • continuing to work with participating First Nations to identify appropriate mitigation or accommodation measures and/or other appropriate means by which to address/resolve potential impacts identified by First Nations • working with First Nations to establish and document the required measures to be included as proponent commitments in the context of the certification of the Project

Consultation Scheduling Taseko expects to file its Application on or about January 15, 2009. It is anticipated that First Nations consultation will continue throughout the Application Review phase of the EA process, and that Taseko will keep the Crown appropriately informed of the consultation throughout. Once the Application is submitted Taseko will work with participating First Nations to establish and document a schedule of planned meetings appropriate for each First Nation throughout the Application Review period. This schedule will reflect the availability and desired level of participation of the individual First Nations.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-107 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 2: First Nations

At a minimum we propose to deliver complete copies of the Application to all interested and effected First Nations and offer to provide an initial overview of the Application and explain the approach used in its preparation and answer any initial questions they may have. We are also prepared to hold further meetings as may be appropriate with all interested and effected First Nations, collectively or individually as is preferred by them. We propose an initial round of meetings take place in early February 2009 if possible. Once the Application has been accepted for review and the Application Review phase of the assessment process is fully underway we propose a second set of meetings with First Nations, to take place in March 2009. This second round of meetings would enable a more in-depth examination and discussion of specific areas and issues of First Nation interest.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 2-108 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 3: References

3 References

Aboriginal Canada Portal. 2008. Available at: http://www.aboriginalcanada.gc.ca/ Alexander, Diana. 1996. A Cultural Heritage Overview of the Western Half of the Williams Lake Forest District. Ministry of Forests. Williams Lake, BC. Alexander, Diana. 1997. A Cultural Heritage Overview of the Cariboo Forest Region. Ministry of Forests, Williams Lake, BC. Bouchard, Randy and Kennedy, Dorothy. 1979. Shuswap Stories. Secwepemc CommCept Publishing Ltd.: Vancouver. British Columbia (BC) Treaty Commission. Treaty Commission Annual Report. 2007. Vancouver, BC. British Columbia Environmental Assessment Office (BCEAO). 2006. Mine Proponents Guide: How to Prepare Terms of Reference and an Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate. Available at: http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/guide/mine/2006/MineProponentsGuide_WorkingDraft_sep2006.pdf (Accessed September 2, 2008). British Columbia Environmental Assessment Office (BCEAO). 2003. British Columbia Supplementary Guide to First Nations: The British Columbia Environmental Assessment Process. Available at: www.eao.gov.bc.ca/guide/2003/sections/sup-guide-fn.pdf (Accessed September 2, 2008). British Columbia Government. 2005. Available at: http:// http://www.gov.bc.ca/ (Accessed on November 5, 2005). Brow, James. 1972. Shuswap of Canada. Hraflex Books Descriptive Ethnography Series: Connecticut. Carrier Chilcotin Tribal Council. 2008. Available at: http://www.carrierchilcotin.org/ (Accessed November 5, 2008). Dawson, George. 1891. Notes on the Shuswap People of British Colombia. Royal Society of Canada Transactions. Section II. Ehrhart-English, Cindy L. 1994. The Heritage Significance of the Fish Lake Study Area. Human and Environmental Studies Ltd. Sidney, BC. Ehrhart-English, Cindy L. 1993. An Overview of the Heritage Significance of the Proposed Power and Transportation Corridors Servicing the Fish Lake Project. Appendix 1 in: Tyhurst, 4. 1995. Fish Lake Heritage Resource Study: Report on the 1993 Archaeological Survey of the Fish Lake Mine Project and Access Corridor in S. Central B.C. Farrand, Livingston. 1900. Traditions of the Chilcotin Indians. Memoirs of the American Museum of Natural History. Fraser, S. 1960. The Letters and Journals of Simon Fraser, 1806–1808. W. Kays Lamb, Editor, Toronto:MacMillan. Friends of the Nemiah Valley. Available at: http://www.fonv.ca/index.html (Accessed November 5, 2008). Glavin, Terry and the People of the Nemiah Valley. 1992 Nemiah The Conquered Country. New Star Books: British Colombia

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 3-1 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 3: References

Government of British Columbia. 2007a. Tsilhqot'in Nation vs. British Columbia, 2007 BCSC 1700. November 2007. Government of British Columbia. 1995. Cariboo-Chilcotin Land Use Plan 90-Day Implementation Process Final Report, February 15, 1995. Government of British Columbia. 2007b. Cariboo-Chilcotin Land Use Plan: Chilcotin Sustainable Resource Management Plan, June 2007. Government of British Columbia. 2005. Cariboo-Chilcotin Land Use Plan: Williams Lake Sustainable Resource Management Plan, October 2005. Haagan, Claudia. 2008. Assessment of Potential First Nation Interests in Territory on which Gibraltar Mine is Situated Indian Claims Commission (ICC). 2008. ICC Recommends Canada Accept the Williams Lake Indian Band Village Site Claim for Negotiation. 2006. Available at: http://www.indianclaims.ca/services/new-en.asp?id=118/(Accessed September 16, 2008). Indian of Northern Affairs (INAC). 2007. http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/index-eng.asp (Accessed November 2008) Indian of Northern Affairs (INAC). 2008. http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/index-eng.asp (Accessed November 2008) Ignace, Marianne Boelscher. 1998. Shuswap. In: Handbook of North American Indians: Plateau Vol. 12., ed. William Sturtevant. Washington: Smithsonian Institution. Pp 203-219. Jack, Rita; Matthew, Marie; and, Matthew, Robert. 1993. Shuswap Community Handbook. Secwepemc Cultural Education Society Lane, Robert. 1953. Cultural Relations of the Chilcotin of West Central British Columbia. Unpublished Ph.D Dissertation, University of Washington, Seattle. Lane, Robert. 1981. Chilcotin. In: Handbook of North American Indians: Subarctic Vol. 6., ed. William Sturtevant. Washington: Smithsonian Institution. Pp 402-412. Littlemore, Richard. 2000. Nemiah: Home of the Xeni Gwet’in Pacific Salmon Forests Project. David Suzuki Foundation: British Colombia. Matson, RG and Magne, Martin. 2007. Athapaskan Migrations: The Archaeology of Eagle Lake, British Colombia. University of Arizona Press: Tucson. Ministry of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation, 2008. www.gov.bc.ca/arr. (Accessed November 2008. Muckle, Robert J. 1998. Archaeological Resources in Wells Gray Provincial Park: An Overview Inventory and Preliminary Impact Assessment Report prepared for the North Thompson Indian Band, Barrier, B.C. Northern Shuswap Tribal Council. Available at: http://www.nstq.org/nstc.htm (Accessed November 5, 2008). Northern Shuswap Treaty Society. 2006. Available at: http://nstq.org/nsts/ourtreaty.htm. (Accessed September 9, 2008). Powell, G. 2005. A Regional Profile of Non-Timber Forest Products Being Harvested from the Cariboo- Chilcotin, British Columbia Area. Prepared for: The Centre for Non-Timber Resources, Royal Roads University, Victoria, BC.

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 3-2 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 3: References

Palmer, Andie Diane. 2005. Maps of Experience: The Anchoring of Land to Story in Secwepemc Discourse. University of Toronto Press: Toronto. Rothenburger, Mel. 1978. The Chilcotin War. Mr. Paperback: Langley, BC. Secwepemc Cultural Education Society and Simon Fraser University. 1999. Re tsuwet.s re Secwepemc: The Things We Do. Secwepemc Cultural Education Society. Kamloops. Secwepemc. Available at: http://www.secwepemc.org/ (Accessed November 5, 2008) Statistics Canada. 2008. Cariboo J, British Columbia (table). Aboriginal Population Profile. 2006 Census. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 92-594-XWE. Ottawa. Released January 15, 2008. http://www12.statcan.ca/english/census06/data/profiles/aboriginal/Index.cfm?Lang=E (accessed November 6, 2008). Teit, James A. 1909a. “Notes on the Chilcotin Indians” Memoirs of the American Museum of Natural History 4: 759-789. Teit, James A. 1909b. “The Shuswap” Memoirs of the American Museum of Natural History. 4:477-758 Tsilhqot’in National Government, 2008. Available at: http://www.tsilhqotin.ca/abouttng.htm (Accessed September 12, 2008) Tsi Del Del., 2008. Available at: http://www.tsideldel.org/. (Accessed September 12, 2008) Tyhurst, Robert. 1984. The Chilcotin: An Ethnographic History. Unpublished M.A. Tyhurst, Robert. 1995. Fish Lake Heritage Resource Study: Report on the 1993 Archaeological Survey of the Fish Lake Mine Project and Access Corridor in S. Central B.C. Report for Taseko Mines Ltd. Unknown Author, 2008. ‘We do not know his name: Klatassen and the Chilcotin War’ website. http://www.canadianmysteries.ca/sites/klatsassin/home/indexen.html Wolf, Annabel Cropped Eared and Matthew, Robert. 1996. Shuswap History: A Century of Change. Secwepemc Cultural Education Society. Kamloops. Xat’Sull ‘cmetem: Soda Creek First Nations. 2008. http://www.xatsull.com/Administration/EconomicDevelopment/tabid/65/Default.aspx (Accessed November 7, 2008). Xeni Gwet’in: People of Nemiah. Available at: http://www.xenigwetin.com/index.php?mod=home (Accessed November 5, 2008).

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 3-3 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project

Section 4: Appendices

4 Appendices

Appendix 8-2-A Tables of First Nation Engagement and Consultation Appendix 8-2-B The Heritage Significance of the Fish Lake Study Area: Ethnography

March 2009 Environmental Impact Statement/Application Taseko Mines Limited Volume 8 Page 4-1 Prosperity Gold-Copper Project