The B.C. Environmental Assessment Office (EAO) is seeking input from the public that will help inform its final report to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change Strategy to make a decision on whether Western High Yield (WHY) Resources’ Record Ridge mine proposal requires an environmental assessment.
On April 18, the Minister of Environment and Climate Change Strategy and the EAO received a formal request from the environmental organization Wildsight.
Simon Wiebe, Wildsight mining policy and impact researcher, submitted a comprehensive and detailed letter to the EAO that addressed several environmental concerns and questionable assertions in the WHY Resources mining application.
The Wildsight letter sought clarity regarding impacts to endangered species and ecological communities, improper permit designation, and mine operation concerns for residents of Rossland, Sheep Creek, Red Mountain and surrounding area.
“We must carefully consider if the potential for a handful of seasonal jobs, limited tax revenues, and the production and refinement of critical minerals in another country is worth it for British Columbians and the land and water resources we are responsible for safeguarding,” said Wiebe.
As the EAO indicates, an environmental assessment for an open pit mineral mine is not a requirement, but previous concerns and queries and the letter from Wildsight prompted the review.
“The EAO accepted this letter as an application under Section 11 of the Environmental Assessment Act to have Record Ridge be designated as a reviewable project.”
The process includes a public engagement period, not to be confused witt the Ministry of Energy, Mines and Low Carbon Innovation public consultation process that was prompted by WHY Resources notice of application and goes until May 28.
The public consultation invites residents and organizations to submit comments and answer questions relevant to the mine proposal posed by EAO.
The EAO will then summarize and analyse the information received and prepare a report for the minister to support the decision as to whether an environmental assessment is required.
“The EAO’s review of a request for designation is not a full assessment,” reads the EAO Project Designation Request. “The review is meant to check whether the project has the potential to cause significant effects and should be considered for a full environmental assessment.”
WHY’s own designation as a mineral mine and not a metal mine with a reduced production of 200,000 tonnes per year technically excludes them from an environmental assessment.
However, Deputy Chief Executive Assessment Officer and Assistant Deputy Minister, Chris Trumpy, recognizes in a May 2 letter to the mining company that there has been a lack of clarity over the classification of this proposed open-pit magnesium mine.
“Given the designation request, this question will be considered as part of that analysis,” says a Ministry of Environment spokesperson.
Wildsight disputes WHY’s designation, and asserts that the Record Ridge mine is clearly a metal mine and not a mineral mine.
“Even ignoring the obvious argument that magnesium is indeed a metal, WHY processing diagrams identify both nickel and iron as marketable products made in their proposed production facility from serpentinite ore,” said Wiebe.
“Therefore, not only do they fail to meet the BC’s legislated definition of what an industrial mineral is, they also fail to meet their own substituted definition.”
Wildsight maintains that unproven resource companies, like WHY, are especially risky if the proposed processing facility ends up failing to produce profitable magnesium products.
Junior companies have proven to be at “high risk of bankruptcy, which often results in abandonment of environmental duties and loss of any economic benefits that local communities may have enjoyed.”
The EAO public comment period opened on May 15 at 9 a.m. and will close on June 14 at 11:59 p.m. PT.
Go to Record Ridge Industrial Mineral Mine project request at projects.eao.gov.bc.ca/RecordRidge-PD for more information.