| Citation |
MacDonald, D.D., A. Schein, J.A. Sinclair, and J. Stockner (2013) A Review of the Adequacy of Baseline Water Quality Data and Mitigation of Mining Impacts in the Vicinity of the New Prosperity Gold-Copper Mine Project, British Columbia. Prepared by MacDonald Environmental Sciences Ltd. and UBC Fisheries Centre & Eco-Logic Ltd. Prepared for Tsilhqot'in National Government for the New Prosperity Panel Hearings Williams Lake, July 2013. |
| Abstract/Description or Keywords |
The New Prosperity Gold-Copper Mine project (which is located 125 km southwest of Williams Lake, B.C.) is subject to review under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act. In a report released in 2010, a Federal Review Panel concluded that the original Prosperity Gold-Copper Mine project would have significant effects on fish and fish habitat, on navigation, on the current use of lands and resources by First Nations, on cultural heritage, and on certain potential or established Aboriginal rights or title, as well as other land and water uses in the region. In response to the results of the Federal Review Panel, the Proponent (Taseko Mines Ltd.; TML) revised the mine development plan and submitted a project description for the New Prosperity Mine to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA) in 2011. In addition, TML submitted an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the project to the CEAA in 2012 (TML 2012). The CEAA reviewed the submission relative to the EIS Guidelines (CEAA 2012) it had created, which provided TML with a list of information requirements for the EIS. The CEAA’s Federal Review Panel then identified a number of deficiencies in the EIS and provided TML with a number of associated information requests to address these deficiencies in December 2012 (New Prosperity Gold-Copper Mine Project Federal Review Panel 2012). MacDonald Environmental Sciences Ltd.-Pacific Environmental Research Centre (MESL-PERC) was retained by the Tsilhqot’in National Government (TNG) to review those components of the EIS for the New Prosperity Gold-Copper Mine project that related to water quality conditions in the vicinity of the mine. The key questions that were addressed in this review included: • Are the available data and information adequate to determine baseline water quality conditions in the vicinity of the proposed mine site? • Have baseline water quality conditions been adequately characterized in the documents that have been submitted to CEAA? • Are the predictions of future water quality conditions in the vicinity of the proposed mine site scientifically defensible? • Have the effects of the proposed changes in water quality conditions been adequately described and evaluated? This report was prepared to provide the TNG with an evaluation of the EIS relative to the characterization of baseline conditions and the predictions of the effects of the project on water quality conditions in the vicinity of the mine. Below we detail the deficiencies in the EIS with respect to the following topics. • Evaluation of the adequacy of baseline water quality data, including: • Inadequacies of Baseline Water Quality Data for Streams and Rivers; • Inadequacies of Baseline Water Quality Data for Lakes near the Mine Site; • Inadequacies of Baseline Sediment Quality Data; • Inadequacies of Water Quality Model and Predictions of Future Water Quality Conditions; • Inadequacies of the Baseline Watershed Model; and, • Inadequacies of Baseline Characterization of Dissolved Oxygen and Water Temperature. • The adequacy of evaluations of water quality during mine construction, operations, and closure, including: • Inadequacies of the Approach Used to Select Water Quality Guidelines; • Inadequacies of Selection of Water Quality Guidelines; • Inadequacies of Water Quality Predictions - Interpretation Using Water Quality Guidelines: Fish Lake, Upper Fish Creek, Tributary 1, and Pit Lake; • Inadequacies of Water Quality Predictions - Interpretation Using Water Quality Guidelines: Beece Creek and Taseko River; • Inadequacies of Water Quality Predictions - Interpretation Using Water Quality Guidelines: Lower Fish Creek; • Inadequacies of Water Quality Predictions - Interpretation Using Water Quality Guidelines: Wasp Lake, Little Onion Lake, and Big Onion Lake; • Inadequacies of Water Quality Predictions - Selection of Locations; • Inadequacies of Water Quality Predictions - Interpretation Using Toxicity Reference Values/Ecological Screening Values; • Inadequacies of Water Quality Predictions - Interpretation Using Biotic Ligand Modelling; • Inadequacies of Water Quality Predictions - Selection of Time Periods; • Inadequacies of Water Quality Predictions - Evaluation of Effects of Chemical Mixtures; • Inadequacies of Predictions of Mine-Related Effects on Hydrological Conditions; • Inadequacies of Characterization of the Food Web; • Inadequacies of Water Quality Predictions - Evaluation of Cumulative Within-Project Effects; • Inadequacies of Determination of Significant Residual Effects; • Inadequacies of Mitigation and Adaptive Management Plans; and, • Inadequacies of Planned Water Quality and Aquatic Ecology Monitoring Program. |
