Public Engagement Plan and Tailored Impacts Statement Guidelines Comments

Reference Number
72
Text

The following are comments regarding the Upper Beaver Gold Project, in response to the invitation for comments on the Public Engagement Plan, and the Tailored Impact Statement Guidelines. Our overall takeaways were that the guidelines were thorough and provided good direction about data collection. We appreciate the clear articulation of GBA+ applications throughout the guidelines and the instructions with respect to impacts on Indigenous rights and livelihood. We do note however that how the information collected would be applied to the context of the project is left to the discretion of the proponent, including standards of research and methodology of data collection and presentation. This leaves an overall suggestion of independence to choose project impacts mitigation standards that best reflect the needs of proponent. We also would like to note instruments such as the departmental formatted word document being filled out by other departments is an accessible way to help folks prepare comments. Having optional devices such as that or other similar tools, such as valued components determination figures/charts be publicly available would be beneficial to all those interested in participating in these comment periods.
 

Public engagement plan

2. Description of the Proposed Project

The opportunity to comment on the Detailed project description led to some significant listings in the Summary of Issues statement issues by the ministry. The opportunity for the public to comment on project activities was limited in scope and for a very brief period of time. It would be helpful to provide longer windows of opportunity to be able to review documents at the community level, as often people have to do so on a volunteer basis outside of their regular jobs and that can be difficult and time consuming.

3. Objective of Public Participation

The capacity to participate in an informed manner’ the documents provided are quite long, and many people are visual or auditory learners. The practice of posting documents alone on a site to give the public information is insufficient for learning purposes. The ministry does provide information sessions. For this project the following opportunities were provided: February 8, 2022, from 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. EST; February 17, 2022, from 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. EST; March 3, 2022, from 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. EST.

We thank the ministry for providing information sessions that occurred in the evenings to accommodate people that have to work during the day. We suggest that it would be helpful to have recorded presentations available on the site for people to watch in case they miss these opportunities.

5. Public participation tools

The listings of the kinds of opportunities are flexible and well thought out. Our suggestion would be to consider direct advocacy work through phone calls, emails or in person distribution via the proponent to give the opportunity for further awareness throughout the community. The window of comment periods is short, and people can miss deadlines because they find out too late about opportunities for comment, or not at all. The opportunities to reach out or get information are available, timely and responsive, however there is a component of outreach missing.
 

Tailored Impact Statement Guidelines

4. Project Purpose, Need and Alternatives Considered

4.3. 4.4. It would be important to understand what economic feasibility standards were used in considering alternative options. Technologically advanced methods of mineral development exist but are often cited as not being economically feasible, and we would be interested in reviewing independently collected data of costs and benefits to alternative, more environmentally sound operation methods.

Other points of concern: There are four options briefly noted in the detailed project description about potential approaches to the project. A fuller explanation of reasoning why the three other options for ore extraction were not selected, and why an open pit method was selected to address historical mine infrastructure is necessary. The impacts to the Misema River system are extreme and have direct impacts to local Indigenous community cultural practices. The utilization of water bodies to mitigate project impacts has serious implications for the ecological resilience of an already stressed ecosystem.

Kirkland Lake has Anishinaabe and Algonquin women residents who are water keepers and have concerns about impacts to their access to water sources and the ripple effects to children in utero, their family’s health and well being and future implications of project activities and eventual closure and removal of proposed dams

A further explanation of what [Agnico Eagle has not identified any feasible alternative means of carrying out the Project that meet the purpose of the Project] entails, there are alternative means, but they are not feasible to the viability of the project because of economic considerations? Technical applications or some combination? More clarity is needed on reasoning as the response indicates in the event of an IA

Consideration of alternative effluent discharge location that is not utilizing the Misema River system nor adjacent bodies of water is a high priority for Indigenous community residents and surrounding townships members. The proposed effluent discharge site has direct implications for the resilience of the river system and the health of the people that rely on the river.

Wetlands provide a huge bounty of ecosystem services, they; are a source of food and medicines; improve water quality; provide habitat for wildlife; are a habitat for fish; provide flood mitigation; reduce erosion; provide climate change mitigation; have recreation and tourism value. Of significant importance to First Nations people in the region, wetlands have cultural and spiritual significance, and they are groundwater recharge and discharge points. This is an important point because the implications for effluent discharge or collateral damage/ pollution in the water could seep into the groundwater and be carried along a wider impact radius than stated in the detailed project description.

The ecological impacts are significant enough to warrant a thorough investigation into the project plans to provide solutions that protect our waters, the potential for humans impacts via groundwater seepage must be investigated and scientific data gathering, including a groundwater seepage risk assessment in accordance with XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act. This includes an Ecological Risk Assessment AND a Human Health Risk Assessment report.

Superimposing over bodies of water will have direct cultural and environmental impacts. Both in reduction of navigable waters for fish to frequent and pollution in the water. The proposed site plan in DPD Figure D.5: Wetlands and Low-Lying Areas the proposed final effluent discharge goes right into the Misema River and flows downstream through wetlands making it a direct contravention of the principles of sustainability outlined in the provincial wetland’s conservation strategy, notably, the Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act (Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry. 2017. A Wetland Conservation Strategy for Ontario 2017–2030. Queen’s Printer for Ontario. Toronto, ON).

In addition, this site and adjoining riversides are frequented by fishermen and trappers depending on the season. The impacts to the surrounding water bodies cannot be understated. As noted above, the initial site plan has mapped the effluent discharge point directly into wetlands and flowing downstream, in Figure D.3 Watershed Boundary Map we can see this river continuing through a series of small lakes and rivers and ultimately flowing into/ through South Grassy Lake Conservation Reserve. Conservation Reserves protect significant natural and cultural features while providing opportunities for a variety of compatible traditional activities. Regulated under the Provincial Parks and Conservation Reserves Act, they are also important for scientific research and environmental monitoring. Wetlands are a foundational ecosystem service that have rippling implications for variety of plants and animals that frequent the region. The effluent discharge point is placing undue strain on ecologically sensitive points and will pollute this conservation reserve in addition to the negative cultural impacts of ecological degradation.

6. Description of engagement with Indigenous Communities

6.2 Record of Engagement

where applicable, a copy of each community-specific engagement plan developed collaboratively by the Indigenous community and the proponent for the Project. If only one engagement plan was developed solely by the proponent for engagement with all Indigenous communities, provide a rationale for this approach;’ -It is difficult to imagine a reasonable rationale for this. What is a minimum standard for an acceptable rationale? This raises questions about how justifications are considered and evaluated.

6.4 Collaboration with Indigenous peoples following the submission of the Impact Statement

We recommend the following verbiage be added to the list of Impact Statement responsibilities:

The impact statement must outline accountability mechanisms for ensuring that Indigenous peoples will be involved in project activities and decision-making processes throughout the lifecycle of the project. The mechanisms will be determined by both impacted Indigenous communities and the proponent mutually.

7. Assessment Methodology

7.6 Cumulative Effects Assessment

When will an updated version of assessing cumulative effects be introduced? The CEAA 2012 guide of ten years old and we have new scientific information to guide us more effectively.

7.4 Effects Assessment Methodology & 7.7 Extent to which the effects are significant

The extent to water and watershed impacts is an area of particular concern for all people we have spoken to about the project. The amount of water diversion and the effluent discharge point have significant impact to cumulative effects in the region, especially when considering previous major mining activity all around the region.

For Indigenous women in particular, as water keepers and life givers the significance of having access to clean drinking water and pollutants entering bodies of water. Aquatic testing and impacts studies that have rigor and consider broader implications are critical to health and safety of women and their children in the region.

8. Biophysical Environment

8.7 Fish and Fish Habitat

We suggest including instructions to collect baseline data of a minimum period of two the three spawning seasons to generate more reliable data. Sufficient collection of information is required over a longer period of time to make accurate predictions in species impacts and planning methodologies that emerge from quality baseline data. This seems to have been addressed by the proponent to an extent with initial collection and sampling going back to 2018. However, the additional requirements imposed by these guidelines and determinants articulated in the methodologies require as long of a sampling period as possible to accurately assess project impacts.

10. Indigenous Peoples

We want to affirm that the direction for Indigenous communities who wish to contribute directly to the drafting of the impact assessment is a great step in inclusive practices and provides open opportunities for communities to become directly involved.

10.4. Mitigation and enhancement measures

describe how the GBA Plus results on disproportionate effects have been used to inform mitigation and enhancement measures;’ we suggest adding collaborative development opportunities with diverse subsections of Indigenous peoples such as women, gender diverse or those with disabilities to ensure mitigation measures that accurate reflect the needs of distinctly impacted subgroups. Though there is a summary instruction to insert input of perspectives, its best to articulate consultation with specific demographics instead of Indigenous communities as a whole.

13. Canada’s ability to meet its environmental obligations and its Climate Change Commitments

Overall Comments:

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change focuses on several key aspects, the mitigation of GHG’s being one. The response summary addresses this target noting that the Upper Beaver project has ‘a relatively small GHG footprint compared to many industrial operations.’ Agnico Eagles GHG projections must be compared to similar mining operations, both proximally (KL Gold and others) and industry wide to draw accurate, reflective comparisons.

The Upper Beaver project could be adopting the use of Best Available Technologies and Best Environmental Practices in accordance with the principles outlined in the Strategic Assessment of Climate Change (SACC), as a range of feasible options was considered not economically viable for the project, a detailed investigation into alternative means and chosen practices must be provided to demonstrate a compelling need to not utilize BAT’s. In addition, information on measures being taken to reduce GHG emissions on an ongoing basis including detailed description of technologies and practices is needed.

Concerns about Canada’s domestic and international climate change commitments must be adequately reviewed. We call on Agnico Eagle, the Ministry of the Environment, the Environmental Protection  and on the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada to ensure an accurate and direct correlation and explanation of how the Upper Beaver Gold project is aligned (or misaligned) with the goals outlined in the Pan-Canadian Framework on Clean Growth and Climate; with the Aichi Biodiversity Targets; with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals; and the other relevant applicable policy frameworks outlined in the tailored impacts guidelines with demonstrable, tangible drivers that support climate change adaptation efforts from a project planning perspective.

15. Follow-up Programs

15.2. Follow up program monitoring

plans, including funding options, to involve Indigenous communities and local communities in monitoring, where appropriate.’ We suggest the removal of the words ‘where appropriate’ in this instruction as opportunities for inclusion could arguably be implemented in all stages of monitoring and compliance measures. Another option would be to replace ‘where appropriate’ with ‘at every available opportunity’.

Pg. 158 Indigenous Participation and Engagement

The guides listed are within the sphere of government publications, we suggest incorporating Indigenous engagement studies that have been conducted by and for indigenous communities. Such as Indigenous Communities and Industrial Camps: Promoting Healthy Communities in Settings of Industrial Change by the firelight group, Lake Babine Nation and Nak’azdli Whut’en; Indigenous Women and Impact Assessment Final Report by the Native Women’s Association of Canada.

We look forward to further opportunities to participate in the Upper Beaver Gold Project Impact Assessment process.
Respectfully,

Invitation to Voices Project Team
Keepers of the Circle

Submitted by
Keepers of the Circle
Phase
Planning
Public Notice
Public Notice - Public Comments Invited on the Draft Tailored Impact Statement Guidelines and the Draft Public Participation Plan
Attachment(s)
N/A
Date Submitted
2022-03-11 - 3:14 PM
Date modified: