Error
  • Error loading feed data.
Items filtered by date: August 2011

The proposed Sisson Tungsten/Molybdenum/Copper mine near Stanley, New Brunswick, has the potential to create significant negative impact on and catastrophic risk for:

•    Atlantic salmon habitat vulnerable to changes in the hydrologic regime and heavy metal deposition.
•    The Nashwaak Watershed, a valuable economic and ecological resource, currently one of the post pristine watersheds in New Brunswick.
•    Wetland habitats.
•    Extensive areas of economically valuable hardwood and mixedwood Acadian Forest, a forest type under stress.
•    Human health and safety in the Nashwaak Watershed, and in the open-pit itself, due to an unacceptable level of risk of failure of the extensive and high tailing dams.
•    Human and ecological health due to air emissions of dust with elevated levels of arsenic and lead in an extensive area of the projected dust plume of this mine.

Take Action!


Action 1:


Join CCNB, Mining Watch Canada and the Sierra Club of Canada - Atlantic Chapter in requesting a review panel for the Sisson Tungsten/Molybdenum/Copper Open-Pit Mine. A petition asking for a review panel has also been drafted in case you want to circulate to your contacts.

You can send a letter requesting a review panel -- the highest level of Environmental Assessment -- to:

Hon. Peter Kent
Minister of Environment
kent.p@parl.gc.ca

Tara Oak, Project Manager, Sisson Project
Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency
Sisson@ceaa-acee.gc.ca

Hon. Margaret-Ann Blaney
NB Minister of Environment
margaret-ann.blaney@gnb.ca

Hon. Keith Ashfield
Minister of Fisheries and Oceans
keith.ashfield@parl.gc.ca

cc - Mike Allen
MP for Tobique-Mactaquac
mike.allen@parl.gc.ca

* If you would like to have your comments posted on this page, please cc your letters to us at forest@ccnbaction.ca You can find submissions in the bottom section of this page.


Action 2:



Concerns with the Draft Terms of Reference (TOR) for the Sisson Project Environmental Impact Statement are being accepted until October 3, 2011.

Please find 16 points of concern with the Draft Terms of Reference below. For those interested in finding out more about each concern and commenting, each concern is discussed in further detail here.

Comments can be sent to:

Hon. Peter Kent
Minister of Environment
kent.p@parl.gc.ca

Cc: Hon. Margaret-Ann Blaney
NB Minister of Environment
margaret-ann.blaney@gnb.ca

Hon. Keith Ashfield
Minister of Fisheries and Oceans
keith.ashfield@parl.gc.ca

Tara Oak, Project Manager, Sisson Project
Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency
Sisson@ceaa-acee.gc.ca

16 points of concern:

1.       Totally unacceptable level of project definition and scope at this stage of the EA/EIA, leaving the public and government at a severe disadvantage in commenting on the TOR.

2.       Inaccurate and incomplete articulation of proponent responsibilities with regard to cost/benefit analysis of all VECs.

3.       Unconstitutional articulation of proponent responsibilities to First Nations as defined in existing Treaties and the U.N. Declaration of Indigenous Rights.

4.       Inadequate acceptance of proponent responsibility to address the issues related to water quality under the Province of New Brunswick’s Water Classification Regulations.

5.       Inadequate requirements for proponent bonding to mitigate impacts of unexpected catastrophic events for which known risk factors are calculable based on historical performance of similar projects.

6.       Unacceptable requirements for proponent engagement and scrutiny in public consultation

7.       Inadequate acceptance of proponent responsibility to consider alternative ways of completing the project.

8.       Inadequate acceptance of proponent responsibility to consider the “do nothing” alternative to the project.

9.       Inadequate guidance on determining the project footprint at the Local Assessment Area (LAA) level.

10.   Inadequate guidance for a proper and effective HHERA(Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment).

11.   Inadequate requirement for peer review of scientific aspects of the TOR.

12.   Inadequate guidance on considering the historical record of mining in Canada, including its record of social irresponsibility, and its impacts on the integrity of rural communities.

13.   Unacceptable level of guidance on considering impacts of the environment on the project.

14.   Unacceptable level of guidance on considering reasonably predictable future combined impacts, either those of the current proponent or in combination with other projects.

15.  Unacceptable specification of the possible tailing facility.

16.   Unacceptable assumptions at this point in the process.
Published in Action Alerts