?ESDILAGH FIRST NATION #4 - 9001 West Fraser Road Quesnel BC V2J 6R4 Phone: (250) 747 - 2255 Fax: (250) 747 - 3920 Email [email protected]

August14, 2013

Proposed New Prosperity Mine Review Panel Secretariat New Prosperity Gold-Copper Mine Project Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency 160 Elgin Street, 22nd Floor, Place Bell Canada Ottawa, ON K1A 0H3 Telephone: 613-957-0700 or 1-866-582-1884; Fax: 613-957-0941 Email: [email protected]

?Esdilagh First Nation Community Hearing Presentation Provided by Chief Bernie Mack, ?Esdilagh First Nation

Dear Panel Members, Elders, Community Members, Leaders and Guests:

I am pleased to be here today on our ancestral lands and on Alexandria Indian Band Indian Reserve #12 to be speaking to this Federal Review Panel on the proposed New Prosperity Gold-Copper Mine project. It is good that these public hearings are open to the public to those wishing to observe the proceedings and more importantly to hear directly from those most impacted by this proposed project.

The Panel has stated that, “The primary purpose of the hearing is for the Panel to receive the information it requires to complete its assessment of the environmental effects of the project.” It is very important that all people be offered an opportunity to share their information on the impacts of this proposed New Prosperity Gold-Copper Mine project and the environmental effects of this project.

0

In Canada many have learned of the negative consequences of mining where lands and waters have been disturbed and in many places abandoned contaminated waste sites left for the public to clean up after a company has left. We do not want to see that type of negative environmental effect anymore just like most people do not want to see negative environmental effects that damage Mother Earth and destroy the valuable environmental values such as fresh water, fish, vegetation, trees and so on. These environmental values have taken a long time to develop and have provided us with our sustenance and long-term sustainability. I will be speaking directly about and sharing information related to the proposed New Prosperity Gold Copper Mine project as it relates to environmental effects we believe to be important and which must be given full consideration.

First, I want to thank all Elders, Community Members, Leaders, Industry members, Media, Government officials, Panel members and Guests for attending this important Panel Hearing. As many of you know, the Tsilhqot’in are the oldest and longest serving governments in our traditional homelands.

We are making our community presentations to the Federal Review Panel here on our Indian Reserve number twelve which is directly adjacent to Taseko’s Gibraltar Mine. Taseko Mines Limited is the proponent of the New Prosperity Mine; therefore, it is good to see their managers here today. We can share our information on their proposed New Prosperity Mine from our experience of living beside this mine which started operating next to our community over 40 years ago. We believe our experiences here and throughout our larger Tsilhqot’in National Government lands and waters will provide valuable information for the Review Panel to complete its assessment of the significant potential environmental effects of the project.

I want to share a little snapshot of the history of this area as it relates to mining as I believe it is important for people to understand the true historical context of mining in our areas so that we can learn from it with an effort at improving relationships that are of mutual beneficial nature to all people. The potential environmental impacts that will happen if the proposed New Prosperity Mine is approved will be significant; therefore, it is important to learn from past experiences so as to be informed about the true environmental impacts. 1

With this in mind, the most important consideration always for us is the conservation and protection of our lands and waters. As everyone knows, we cannot have a good economy without a healthy environment. The area around which the proposed New Prosperity Mine will be located is an area that is still producing fish, wildlife, plants, medicines and an environment that is free from the environmental impacts of large scale industrial development activities. These environmental values are of the highest importance to our people and to our long-term sustainable economy and survival.

Our historical experience with mining can provide some very valuable understandings and truths about impacts that we have experienced.

Long before Europeans left their homelands in search of freedoms and a better place to live, the Tsilhqot’in Dene were living in this area. Our people were like others who lived in an economy based on using our natural resources to sustain us and using them in a responsible manner. We depended on the fish, wood, wildlife, stone, minerals, trees and vegetation from the lands, waters and natural resources within vast areas for our sustenance. We travelled long distances and set up villages and camps in areas where there was good fishing, hunting, and harvesting of berries, roots, medicines and other life nourishing foods. Our society and governance evolved like others through a co-existence of inter-dependency on the abundance provided by our natural resources.

Our people also came into contact with other people and through these contacts we embraced and became part of a stronger more unified nation. For example, ?Esdilagh First Nation is a First Nation that has mixed Tsilhqot’in and Carrier Dene ancestry. This is a long known fact.

Alexandria or Fort Alexandria is a National Historic Site of Canada on the Fraser River which is located right next to one of our reserves. Our original name is ?Esdilagh which means ‘where the peninsula is” in reference to the geography of the area where we lived along the Fraser River. The Fraser River provided our people with fish, water and a transportation system for as long as we can remember. On June 21, 1793 an explorer named Alexander Mackenzie travelled to our village sites close to this area down on the Fraser River.

2

In 1821, the North West Company established Fort Alexandria as an outpost fur trading fort. In that same year of 1821, the North West Company merged with the Hudson’s Bay Company. Fort Alexandria was named after Alexander Mackenzie and became a community that was to become a key way station along the Hudson’s Bay Brigade Trail. Later, our First Nation was called Alexandria First Nation by the government of Canada when it started setting aside small amounts of land for our people, which the government called Indian Reserves. Like many First Nations, we changed our name back to reflect the reality of who we are. We are now known as we were before any traders, companies and settlers entered into our lands as ?Esdilagh and we are part of the greater Tsilhqot’in Nation which is a part of the greater Dene people who stretch farther north, east, west and south from here. In fact the Dene stretch from northern Alaska all the way to Arizona and Mexico.

Like in many other places of Canada, precious minerals which were originally known to our people to exist, were shown to explorers which set off a Gold Rush. So by 1859, in large part due to the gold discoveries on our lands that ultimately set off the , Fort Alexandria had grown from a Hudson's Bay fur trading post to a large tent community of miners. Other activities started to occur like the building of roads such as the Old . It is interesting to point out that this area is called the Cariboo Region now but because of much so called development; most of the caribou are now gone. This is one clear and important historical point to make with regard to development. If there is no consideration for wildlife and no monitoring or mitigation for impacts on animals like the caribou of the past or the current day deer, moose and small game, they too could suffer the same consequences…loss of habitat, over predation due to development activities opening up lands and making them easier prey to predators including man, and the potential for dumping of waste water from mining activities into the water that sustains them.

Moving along with the brief history of mining activities in our area a sternwheeler called Enterprise was based at Fort Alexandria from where it would ferry passengers and supplies up the Fraser River to Quesnel in the 1800s. From Quesnel a wagon road was built in 1864 to provide a transportation route for miners to travel to . Another road to the gold fields was planned from on the coast of BC to Fort Alexandria, by entrepreneur Alfred Waddington. 3

This road was never built as our ancestors rose up to fight off the intrusions into our homelands. They did this because these intrusions onto our lands were impacting our people and communities in a negative way. Our people were significantly impacted with new diseases, displacement from our lands and resources that sustained us. The impacts to our lands largely due to the Gold Rush and ancillary activities related to it were significant and was largely responsible for the displacement of our people. The impacts to our land, waters, wildlife, vegetation and our very existence caused our ancestors to defend our homelands. Our ancestor’s fear of ongoing harassment, displacement, racist treatment, and marginalization caused them, in the spring of 1864, to rise up to fight against the road through the Valley to the gold fields at Barkerville.

Our ancestors feared infringement on our territory and the increased threat of smallpox, (Small pox was an epidemic that had already killed many of our people and it was an environmental impact that was very detrimental to the population of our people). At that time Klatsassin, a Tsilhqot’in leader, and other Tsilhqot’in attacked one of the road builder’s work camps, killing fourteen road construction workers and setting off what was to be called the Tsilhqot’in War or Chilcotin War. This was an unfortunate incident which later resulted in the hanging of five of our leaders in Quesnel, BC in 1864. The five Tsilhqot'in men who were hanged for defending our lands and way of life were: Telloot, Klatsassin, Tah-pitt, Piele, and Chessus and although we are saddened by what happened to them, we know and understand that when people’s lives are threatened by intrusions into their very lands, culture and survival, disagreements and tragic incidents have happened. I point this out as it is a part of our history and although some people do not like to hear it, it is important as it is part of the relationship experience and how our people were treated from early on. This is a significant impact on us as a people and we can never deny the realities of how our people have been marginalized and treated with disrespect through institutionalized discrimination which unfortunately continues today. This occurs, in part, because people are not told the truth about how our First Nation people have been treated when it comes to land and resource development on the lands of our ancestors.

4

Here is more specific information I would like to share with the Federal Review Panel Secretariat with regard to the proposed New Prosperity Mine which is being proposed by Taseko Mines Limited.

Like many others we have great concerns about the impacts from large scale mining projects on our lakes, creeks, rivers and lands. We want to be assured that our lakes, creeks, rivers and wetlands will not be polluted by the proposed mine development. Our concerns are real as we have heard and seen the impacts on our lands from a similar mine development such as the Gibraltar Mine which is located right next to two of our reserves. Our concern is with the discharge of water and the ability of the mining company and the governments to ensure proper monitoring and proper mitigation measures. Here is an example that makes us uncertain about the ability of the Proponent as well as there being proper oversight and ability by the governments responsible to protect the environment and responsible to protect our Aboriginal rights to engage adequate discharge mitigation measures. In October, 2009 a bypass pipe spilled discharge fluids for 3 days of approximately 45 cubic meters of mine effluent into Souran Lake near this Gibraltar mine which is operated by Taseko. The spill was not found by Taseko or any government or agency responsible for the environment. It was discovered by a local rancher.

The proposed New Prosperity Mine is going to be an open pit mine development with a proposed 70,000 ton per day concentrator facility. The example I have mentioned about the Gibraltar mine provides clear concerns that we have about the environmental impacts of this mine as it relates to water quality and the ability of the proponent and governments to adequately monitor and take immediate mitigation measures when necessary.

Let’s be clear about this concern by highlighting this example further to provide more information to the Panel members. The 2009 discharge loading rates from Gibraltar Mine indicates how much metals enter Fraser River, but not any potential impacts arising from this discharge to human health or Aboriginal Rights. ?Esdilagh First Nation is seeking bi-annual underwater inspection of the diffuser located in the Fraser River. How will the BC Government or Canada deal with Tailings Storage Facility water as discharge and any surplus discharge waters? How does Environment Canada monitor the 800 5

cubic meter discharge threshold to ensure thresholds are kept under the allowable discharge amounts in this permit? If flows cannot be measured during ice buildup then should discharge be allowed? The rivers and watershed near the proposed New Prosperity Mine will face the same challenges we are seeing first hand here at the Gibraltar mine site. The Taseko River is much smaller than the Fraser River yet this proposed mine with a proposed 70,000 ton per day of ore processing plant will be likely discharging significant amounts of tailings water into this much smaller river. This is a significant concern of ours as the salmon have provided a major food source for our people for thousands of years and any pollution that might escape from this proposed mine could seriously impact the salmon and other fish, wildlife, plants and humans.

To add to this example, the East Bank discharge smear into the Fraser River goes for 5km or more in low flow. Dilution will not work. We also want to know who will pay for potential environmental damage. We are concerned about this because we are witnessing these issues right here in a mine operated by the Proponent. We wonder how their pipe leaks were paid for. Was it through reclamation funds or an environmental bond? This is a real concern for us and for anyone using a large water system such as the Fraser River as there will inevitably be issues like this at the proposed New Prosperity Mine. If a leak detection system failed for a small leak such as what happened here at the Gibraltar Mine site, we ask what measures would be put in place to manage multiple or large leaks at the proposed new mine development?

With regard to the proposed New Prosperity Mine, we also have concerns with the management of the waste rock. Waste rock has an impact on the environment and must be managed to reduce any potential negative effects on the surrounding environment. Again we have an example from Gibraltar Mine which to us demonstrates some major concerns. The waste rock dump site number 7 at Gibraltar identified some mitigation measures to support reclamation such as using stumps and timber salvage as a best practice in the 1986 Gibraltar Reclamation Plan with a goal of the area being rehabilitated so that wildlife could return to use the area. The health of our wildlife and fish is critical to our people and our Aboriginal rights to harvest these food sources is impacted by the environmental effects that are created by a lack of proper mitigation measures around waste rock dump sites.

6

Taseko Mines Limited, the BC Government, the government of Canada can and should put up the necessary investment to complete metal uptake studies on plants, wildlife, fish and salmon as these waste rock dumps have a real impact on the environment. Will there be proper monitoring of the proposed New Prosperity Mine site because in our experience, there does not appear to be adequate or proper unbiased ongoing environmental monitoring going on at the Gibraltar Mine. Who is doing the monitoring? Is it the government agencies responsible for the environment or is it the mining company that is doing the monitoring? Will this same scenario occur at the proposed New Prosperity Mine site?

Other similar impacts that we have experienced, which could happen at the New Prosperity Mine site, include loss of flow or redirection of the flow of water. We have experienced that here where Granite creek no longer flows onto our Indian Reserve number 12 due primarily to pit developments. Who is responsible for groundwater on federal lands or crown lands – is it BC government or Canada?

?Esdilagh First Nation is requesting that the rules and penalties for non-compliance with reclamation requirements by a mining company be provided clearly to the public and that any non-compliance be fully enforced. We are concerned about these impacts as we feel that the true costs of ensuring environmental sustainability is not being fully respected. In the case of the many abandoned mine sites that have left contaminated sites across BC, this is indeed true and of a real concern to anyone as it is often the public tax payer that is left to clean up the mess and the local population that has to endure the negative effects from the impacts of the mine.

In 2008 the Treasury Board released figures that showed that had the largest number of contaminated sites on federal land of any province in Canada. At that time B.C. had 4,088 contaminated sites on federal land. The BC provincial government, at that time, identified almost 8,000 more contaminated sites, on B.C. Crown and private land.

?Esdilagh First Nation is very concerned about the potential impacts of the waste rock sites as well as the garbage dumps and sites now called Land Fill Sites or Waste

7

Management Sites used by mines to deposit their waste. Again we see another example of our concerns with regard to Taseko Mines Limited.

Taseko is the proponent of the New Prosperity Mine and we can learn a lot about them by viewing how they currently operate with regard to waste materials. For example, the Cariboo Regional District has a 24 Hectare landfill site located here right next to the Gibraltar Mine. The BC government released the Cariboo Regional District of cost liability to reclaim the pit so who picks up this cost? Is it Taseko and do they use the $2.6 Million dollar bond for the entire clean-up or is it used for other things? Who monitors the reclamation to ensure it is done properly and beyond throwing down grass seeds while Taseko is operating.

Another concern we have is with the potential for waste rock dumps and dump sites retaining walls and tailings pond retaining walls/dams/dikes to fail. If the proposed retaining walls on any of the proposed waste rock dump sites, disposal sites or waste water tailings facilities fail, there will be major environmental damage. Our experience here with Taseko’s Gibraltar Mine is that waste rock dump site number seven failed because the base was not properly packed. If a retaining wall/dam or dyke were to fail at the proposed New Prosperity Mine, it could wipe out Fish Lake. This would cause significant environmental damage to the lake as well as to the watershed and rivers in the area. This is a real concern as with Climate Change happening we are seeing more and more destabilization of infrastructure. For example, in April, 2013 the Salt Lake City Bingham Canyon pit wall collapsed. The proposed New Prosperity Mine is too close to Fish Lake and even government experts are not sure about the impacts and effects of groundwater with regard to stability and other factors.

We also have concerns about the Reclamation related to the proposed New Prosperity Mine. Is there real and adequate financial resources being set aside to ensure that a proper remediation is completed? If the mine site is not remediated, it will have long term impacts on the environment and people of the area. Our concerns here are real as we have an ongoing example to share information about which demonstrates that many concerns are left to guess about.

8

For example, the Gibraltar Mine operated by Taseko has a long-term environmental protection plan with 17 Million in cash and 13 Million as asset security but Taseko reportedly needs 42 Million. This is 12 Million dollars short and the BC government will likely have to assume this but ?Esdilagh First Nation constantly hears from BC Ministry of Environment and the Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources that they have no money for our requests to do studies and ensure that adequate monitoring is done and proper reclamation is completed.

Can Taseko and ?Esdilagh First Nation use QET (Qualifying Environmental Trust) for such studies and pit closures or is it only used for royalty shares converted to Taseko shares as profit?

Further, we wonder if it is true that Taseko did not pay royalties to the BC government in 2012. If this is the case, are there going to be instances where the New Prosperity Mine does not pay royalties as well? Our concern here is with the impact on the environment from governments and industry not adequately planning for remediation measures because if they underfund these critical areas, how does this impact the ability of paying for environmental damages and reclamation repairs?

The 1986 Gibraltar Reclamation Plan states closure of 3,800 acres disturbed land where 3,400 will be treated and reclaimed at a cost of $4 million. We are worried that there will be reclamation issues related to the proposed New Prosperity Mine too.

We have also been very concerned with the size and scope of the proposed New Prosperity Mine. The size of the mine includes a 70,000 ton per day facility while Taseko’s upgraded Gibraltar Mine has the capacity to process 85,000 tons per day of ore, yet no formal Environmental Assessment was called to ensure that the proper information was reviewed before engaging a project that exceeds the threshold for calling an Environmental Assessment by 160 times. Gibraltar Mine has never received an Environmental Assessment for its Expansion despite it vastly exceeding thresholds for the requirement of having an EA.

9

We are very concerned about this as we believe the footprint is larger than what is being stated to avoid an EA Trigger and we believe that the true costs for an adequate reclamation bond will exceed what is proposed for an adequate clean up and remediation and like so many other places in this province, the people and our children will be the ones who pay for the consequences and potential extra costs when the mine closes.

One of our major concerns regarding the proposed New Prosperity Mine is whether there will be proper Environmental Monitoring and whether this will be done independently or not. We believe that in order to have professional and unbiased Environmental Monitoring there needs to be independent monitoring completed and that the costs of this independent monitoring must be shared by industry and governments as they are the biggest beneficiaries of the mining while people, animals and the environment have to absorb the risks if the mine fails. Again, the example we see is right in front of us. At the Gibraltar Mine which is slated to start pumping millions of litres of tailings water into the Fraser River, above what it is currently pumping into the Fraser River when its production fully ramps up and when it obtains its water discharge permit. Despite this industry and governments are reluctant to undertake baseline metal uptake research to see if the land and water is being impacted which if it is will definitely impact the fish, wildlife, plants and humans. These are real concerns which are not currently being addressed for us in a manner that we are confident with as the potential risks to human health is a serious matter that must be given full consideration and treatment.

With regard to Canada’s responsibility to provide approvals and for its responsibilities to protect the rights of First Nations, we also have concerns about the proposed New Prosperity Mine. Will it take into consideration the fact that a past assessment rejected the project with sound reasoning? Will it take into consideration the fact that our people have lived and sustained our history, heritage, culture, economy and society for thousands of years by living off our lands and resources in a sustainable way? We are concerned about this because we have experienced the impacts on this reserve and other reserves from the proponent of the proposed New Prosperity Mine.

10

Our ability to practice our Aboriginal rights have been impacted by the Gibraltar Mine, yet we have never been consulted adequately or accommodated properly for the loss of the use of our lands and waters and the negative impacts to our Aboriginal Rights. All of the Federal Departments of the Government of Canada have been silent to ?Esdilagh First Nation with regard to the significant impacts we have faced from the mine development that started 40 years ago up to now when we are experiencing more impacts from the new massive expansion to the mine. How will the Federal government own up to its responsibilities to the First Nations of Xeni Gwetin if they are not doing anything to address the same issues at the Gibraltar Mine site? We want to know who is responsible for the surface and sub-surface impacts of developments on an Indian Reserve in British Columbia? Is it the BC government or Canada? Can someone please explain this as with the way it is going now, soon environmental legislation will be simply an afterthought or reduced to a side show with no relevance despite its significant importance to the long-term sustainability of all beings on earth.

One final issue that we must clear up is the stereotype that somehow First Nations are opposed to mining. This is false and has been perpetuated by all the other stereotypes that get put out there by people that are unwilling to accept the truth about how our people have been treated in our own lands. One of the biggest negative impacts, environmental or otherwise, from those who have come to our lands to take our resources, lands and wealth, has been the displacement, discrimination, marginalization and attempted destruction of our culture and society. Like many of our Leaders, Elders and people before me, I say, we are not opposed to mining, what we are opposed to is irresponsible mining. The type of mining that has made BC the largest home for contaminated sites in Canada. The type of mining in which absentee owners of the mines benefit while any debts or failures are socialized and placed as a burden on the shoulders of the people that live the closest to the mine and that are ultimately impacted the most by the mine.

11

Here we stand on our Reserve number 12 which is the closest community to the Taseko operated Gibraltar Mine yet we remain marginalized from any benefits from this mine and suffer all the consequences of its development. After over 40 years of existence this mine has provided our people with about 3 jobs and severely impacted our aboriginal rights and displaced us from our lands. We have tried to engage with Taseko in a meaningful and respectful way but we have run into significant challenges with them. I will leave this explanation to our other team members to address.

In conclusion, I want to say that proposed projects like this must respect the original owners of the land. They must develop good working relationships early and get to know the First Nation people and be willing to share with them. It is no surprise that in Alberta or Ontario where an oil field is developed, the non-Aboriginal land owners are provided with accommodation consideration because of the use and impacts to their lands. It is no different when it comes to First Nation lands. We don’t want corporate simplified working relationships that are designed to fulfill watered down soft commitments that have no real beneficial meaning except being good lawyered words in a Corporate Social Responsibility policy maybes.

We want long-term respectful relationships that care about the lands, waters, and environment and future generations to come. If the government and industry are willing to take a proactive and brave step forward and to truly develop meaningful and productive relationships with our people, then you will see commerce and our economy bloom across Canada.

Sechanalyagh, Thank you to all for hearing our concerns and experiences that are directly related to the proposed New Prosperity Mine proposal.

Chief Bernie Mack ?Esdilagh First Nation “The oldest continuous government within our traditional homelands”

12