Editor, The Times:
Re: Harper Creek opposition appears minimal, July 11 issue
I must commend the editor for his excellent review of the single set of comments received by the Environmental Assessment Office. However, I wish that he would have gone a bit further toward developing an explanation of why opposition to the Harper Creek Mine appears minimal.
The comparison of Harper Creek with the Baynes Sound proposal on Vancouver Island seems a bit unfair. After all, since huge tracts of land on Vancouver Island have been claimed for coal mining. There is bound to be an equally large, and well-organized opposition dedicated to making its voice heard by generating a huge response to each and every coal mine proposal on the Island. It could also be that the environmental groups on the Island may have had a more generous warm-up period to get themselves organized.
Many people do not receive or read every copy of the Times. They may have been unaware of the timelines for comment. Even for those who do read the paper, the comment period ended the day before Yellowhead’s open house meeting was held. Perhaps some of the opposition is of a spirit that is generous enough to actually listen to the proposal before dismissing it. Nevertheless, it is to the credit of the individual who did comment on the mine that he/she articulated some of the concerns shared by many in Clearwater and in the North Thompson Valley. Quantity, with regard to the volume of environmental comment, should not to be confused with their quality. I hope that the quality of this submission is appreciated and taken seriously.
Had the editor attempted to explain the minimal opposition to the Harper Creek Mine, the public might have learned that all mineral maps, including one showing the presence of uranium on Yellowhead’s claim are no longer available on the government’s mining claims website. Why is this the case? Could the BC Liberal government be trying to gag the voices of opposition to this project? After all, knee-capping the comment period and removing the mineral maps don’t help the cause of opposition, do they? The above actions are a slap in the face to citizens who fund government websites and review processes through their taxes.
The low level of opposition might also be the result of people working behind the scenes, gathering information, doing research and finding other avenues of expression. After all, opponents to the Harper Creek Mine may have reason to consider the government process to be flawed and biased, with a predetermined conclusion. Maybe Clearwater’s media machine will have to work a wee bit harder to get the real news.
David Simms
Clearwater, B.C.