By Laura Busheikin, Infocus Magazine, August, 2010

Local group fights to prevent proposed coal mine from opening in Fanny Bay.

John Snyder isn’t your typical environmental activist. A solid, silver-haired man with an easy, warm smile and no-nonsense manner, Snyder is a former truck-driver and card-holding Teamster from Alaska. He moved to Fanny Bay in 2005 with his Canadian wife, hoping for a comfortable retirement in this quiet seaside community of around 700. Aside from union involvement, Snyder had never been part of any movement of any kind, nor considered himself particularly ‘green.’

All that changed last October when he attended a community meeting to learn more about a proposed coal mine in his neighborhood.

One of the first things he discovered was that this is a big project: Compliance Energy Corporation, a Vancouver-based company working in partnership with Korean and Japanese investors, is proposing to dig more than 2,200,000 tonnes of coal a year for the next 20 years out of an underground mine in a valley overlooking Fanny Bay. The mine will cover 200 hectares on the surface and 3,100 hectares underground, and will operate 24 hours a day. The coal will likely be shipped by truck to Port Alberni and then by ship to China, where it will be used in steel production.

Snyder was concerned about his well, which had almost run dry the previous summer. Might a coal mine make this worse? Indeed, it might, he learned at the meeting. And there were a whole lot of other things a coal mine just might do. None sounded good to Snyder.

“We’re not going away,” says John Snyder. noting that one of CoalWatch’s concerns is damage to fish-bearing streams. “We’re under no illusion that we’ll stop this mine in the early stages, but we’re prepared to go the whole route.” (Photo by Boomer Jerritt)

Never mind his well—now Snyder was worried about air pollution from toxic coal dust, which can cause or exacerbate health problems ranging from black lung disease to asthma; noise pollution; water pollution that could poison salmon-bearing streams, groundwater, and the ocean waters of Baynes Sound; increased highway traffic; adverse impacts on the local shellfish industry; decreased property values; dangers associated with methane gas in the mine; and something nasty called acid mine drainage (ADM), a type of long-term toxic leakage that can continue long after a mine has closed down, necessitating long-term, expensive remediation efforts. Not to mention the mine’s contribution to global warming.

Today, Snyder is Chair of CoalWatch, the Fanny Bay-based community organization that formed to oppose the coal mine after the October meeting. Part of his job includes talking with the media, which is why he’s sitting with me on a picnic table at the Buckley Bay ferry terminal on a July afternoon, answering questions and enjoying the sunny skies, sparkling ocean and cheerful hubbub of ferry passengers.

With a steering committee of 14 who meet regularly at each others’ homes or in the Fanny Bay Community Hall, CoalWatch is as grassroots as you can get.

“It seems that most of us who are really involved live on Tozer Road,” says Snyder with a laugh. He gestures with his head toward Ship’s Point, a peninsula snaking off of Vancouver Island just to the south of where we’re sitting, which houses Tozer Road, a bucolic country lane that dead-ends in a stand of Douglas Firs. “That’s the hotbed over there,” he adds, grinning.

CoalWatch may be markedly local, but it has a mailing list of 350-400 concerned citizens, not just from Fanny Bay. “If people think this is just the problem of little Fanny Bay, I’m sorry to say they are mistaken,” says Snyder.

He points out that Compliance has rights over a large area extending up to Cumberland, including several possible other mine sites. One of these is the Bear Coal Deposit, about 10 kilometres northwest of Raven, which also would produce metallurgical coal, but with an open pit, rather than underground. No proposal has been submitted for this mine, but the Compliance website states, “It is anticipated that it would be developed in conjunction with the Raven Deposit.”

Although the Raven project is still in the planning stages, many individuals and organizations are voicing their opposition, or at the least, watching the situation closely.

The BC Shellfish Growers Association (BCSGA) passed a resolution opposing the mine, on the grounds that heavy metals and other toxic runoff could compromise this thriving local industry, which depends on clean waters. Baynes Sound (the waters between Vancouver Island and Denman Island) houses 51 per cent of BC’s annual shellfish harvest. The local shellfishery is valued at $17 million annually and employs more than 500 people in jobs that will be around long after the miners pack up and leave, says Roberta Stevenson, BCSGA President.

Neighboring Denman Island, whose western shore is just 6.2 kilometres from the proposed mine, has launched a barrage of opposition from its governing body, the Local Trust Committee, its Residents’ Association, Marine Stewardship Committee, and United Church, and has spawned its own citizens’ group, Denman Island Opposes Coal (DOC), which is working diligently to stop the mine.

Many governing bodies in the region, including the Rural Directors of the Comox Valley Regional District, the Courtenay Council, the Town of Qualicum Beach, the Village of Cumberland, Comox Town Council and The Islands Trust Council have formally expressed concerns, calling for more detailed studies and assessment or simply opposing the project outright.

Environmental groups such as the Wilderness Committee, Sierra Club BC, and Comox Valley Conservation Strategies Planning Association (a consortium of eight organizations) have been speaking out against the mine. In June, a group of activists demonstrated outside Compliance offices during the company’s board meeting, protesting the proposed Raven mine.

Concern from outside the region tends to focus on the implications of opening a new coal mine—the first in almost 25 years—on Vancouver Island, at a time when reliance on fossil fuels looks increasingly short-sighted.

“This campaign is not just about one coal mine in the Comox Valley,” says Tria Donaldson, Pacific campaign coordinator for the Wilderness Committee. “At the heart of our concern is the pure hypocrisy of expanding our fossil fuel industry while claiming to be climate leaders.

“The government of BC has set lofty goals of reducing our provincial emissions by 33 per cent below 2007 levels by 2020. The massive planned expansion of coal mines like Raven Coal undoes any work done on the climate front. If we don’t want to burn coal in Canada because of climate change, how is shipping it off to China to get burned any better?” she adds.

Although most of the coal from the Raven Mine would probably not be used as fuel, virtually all its carbon dioxide, the culprit in global warming, is still released into the atmosphere during the steel-making process. As well, the transportation of the coal—an estimated 98 trucks coming, and 98 going, per day (that’s one leaving every 15 minutes) plus 20 ships coming in and out of Port Alberni—leaves its own considerable carbon footprint.

Beyond the local issues, this is a debate about the direction of BC’s economy and its approach to sustainable resource management.

“I wouldn’t be putting so much time into this if I hadn’t realized that this goes a lot further than my own backyard,” says Snyder, who estimates that he spends 20 to 30 hours a week on CoalWatch business.

British Columbia is North America’s biggest coal exporter, and critics say it is time to change course. “Maybe it’s time to look at saying no new coal mines, period,” says Snyder.

“I’m not under any illusions that we’re going to quickly transition to a totally green economy,” he adds. “But we can start making moves in that direction. People do need jobs, so maybe it’s time to start asking the government to create green jobs.”

Denman Islander Patti Willis saw the big picture right away. A founding member of Denman Island Opposes Coal, Willis has a background that puts her in sharp contrast to John Snyder—she’s a veteran activist with more than 35 years experience engaging in, and often running, peace, forest protection, anti-mining, conservation, and other social justice and environmental campaigns, both locally and internationally. Early this August she was honored with a Stewardship Award from the Islands Trust in recognition of her many years of community service.

Willis says this campaign is different than any other she’s been part of. “The fact that it is 2010 changes the complexion of this. People are looking at these things with a new lens—the lens of climate change. They are asking, ‘Do I want to perpetuate this kind of reliance on fossil fuels?’

“One reason we haven’t seen any group come out seriously in favor of this is that there’s a widespread level of concern and wariness that there never used to be. It’s hard to come out in favor of coal of any kind.”

Willis says the Raven Coal Mine represents the biggest environmental threat Denman Island has seen in at least half a century, and Islanders are clearly very concerned. DOC has about 20 active members and a mailing list of 100; at a June community meeting, close to 200 people showed up, packing the hall, and not a single speaker supported the mine.

While opposition to the mine may seem deafening, especially from the “hotbeds” of resistance on Tozer Road and Denman Island, Compliance Coal Corporation remains confident that the concerns are either unfounded or can be dealt with.

“Our job is to be able to answer the questions that those people are posing. From the very beginning we’ve been committed to being transparent throughout the process and to developing this in a socially and environmentally responsible manner,” says Compliance CEO and President John Tapics in a phone interview.

“It’s very early in the process and we’ve been completing a number of studies that cover a broad spectrum of areas; all of those studies and information will be available to the public,” says Tapics.

Although he is certainly aware of the opposition, Tapics says many people welcome the mine. “There’s a lot of support out there,” he says. “We’ve had over 100 job applications from individuals and contractors looking for employment. We’ve heard lots of positive interest at public meetings and there have been a number of letters to the editor in various papers from individuals indicating they believe this type of employment is necessary in the area and they support us.”

Employment is definitely the big draw for those who support the proposed mine. “The coal mine will create real jobs for people with families that will buy houses and help refill our schools… this will encourage our younger residents to stay here instead of moving to Alberta where the money is,” writes Kim Morton in a letter to the Qualicum publication, The Beacon.

The project website (see below) has FAQs and information sheets offering responses to various concerns. For every point raised by opponents, Compliance offers a solution, a rebuttal or a commitment to study the issue further.

For instance, in response to concerns about coal dust pollution, Compliance states: “The project team will work closely with the community to minimize or eliminate potential impacts from coal dust. All coal transportation trucks will be covered and modern technologies will be used to ensure dust control. An environmental management plan will be put in place to manage dust emissions and air quality will be monitored throughout the life of the project.”

Concerns about the effects of coal washing—which separates dirt and non-coal rock from the coal—include both the amount of groundwater it uses, and the potentially toxic run-off. Compliance responds: “It is estimated that 330 to 490 cubic metres of water will be used per day for coal washing. This is equivalent to the amount of water a medium to large hotel uses in an average day. Almost all the water used is expected to be recycled. Any water released will meet or be better than government water quality standards. A comprehensive water management plan will be implemented to safely and efficiently manage all water requirements.”

And so on, point counter point, for each topic. Snyder, however, finds these responses insufficient. He and his colleagues are in dialogue with Compliance, but their hopes of stopping the mine are pinned on both the Federal and Provincial governments.

To move forward, the project must successfully pass through complex environmental review processes both provincially and federally. In theory, either of these could stop the mine—although there is no precedent for this in BC, says DOC’s Willis.

“They have never turned down a mine at the environmental review stage in BC,” she says. Still, she remains optimistic. “Ultimately, it will come down to the citizens; it’s so important for the citizens to be vigilant and to comment. The government needs to know we’re watching this; they need to know our concerns,” she says.

Both the Federal and the BC environmental reviews include periods for public input. Willis and Snyder encourage people to express their concerns both in writing, which has a more formal impact, and by showing up and speaking at public meetings, which makes a bolder, more public statement.

As the public review process gets underway, CoalWatch will provide guidance on its website for members of the public wanting to take part.

The review process itself is controversial. CoalWatch and its allies are pressing to have the federal process upgraded from its current form (called a Comprehensive Federal Review) to a more stringent level, called the Full Expert Panel Review, which will include public hearings along with the opportunity to have scientists, mining engineers and other experts present their testimony.

“This is the most exhaustive form of review and from our point of view this deserves nothing less because it is so far reaching in terms of who it affects and how it affects the environment,” says Snyder. As well, almost all the concerned parties are calling for thorough mapping of aquifers, and scientific studies of how they would be impacted by the mine.

In the meantime, things are getting more complicated. Much to many people’s surprise, on July 19, the Federal Office of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA) commenced a public comment period for the proposed mine, with no public notice other than a posting on the CEAA website.

Within days Snyder had fired off a letter of protest to Federal Environment Minister Jim Prentice and spoken on CBC Radio’s On the Island, as well as local radio stations JET FM and The Eagle.

Snyder’s got quite a long list of complaints about the timing of this process: he points out that the proposal for the mine is not even complete, that the key background document is not yet available, that the public can’t properly evaluate the project without aquifer mapping, that there has been no public advertising of the public comments period, and that the project warrants a Full Expert Review Panel.

Annie Roy, CEAA spokesperson, speaking on CBC radio, said the 30-day limit for public comment will be measured from the day the full proposal and background document are posted on the CEAA website, but that no public advertising of this would take place. She did not comment on the other issues.

In his letter, Snyder calls the CEAA to task, stating, “The surprise announcement on July 19 creates the impression that the federal government intends to pursue a hasty and far less rigorous assessment than the proposal warrants,” and he firmly but politely asks the Minister to “restore public confidence” by moving ahead with the Full Expert Panel Review and with aquifer mapping.

This type of swift, decisive response suggests CoalWatch knows how to be a fierce opponent.

“We’re not going away,” says Snyder. “We’re under no illusion that we’ll stop this mine in the early stages, but we’re prepared to go the whole route. Sure, it’s a David and Goliath situation—we’re just a small group up against a bunch of guys whose lunch budget is probably more than our annual income. But I am hopeful that this mine can be stopped.”

He points out that local shellfish farming already provides twice as many jobs as the mine promises, and that these are connected to a sustainable industry which may be threatened by the mine. It’s a lot easier to preserve these jobs than to build a mine that would put them, and so much else, at risk, he says.

“We live in paradise, in the land of plenty. To jeopardize this for a couple hundred coal mining jobs doesn’t make sense.”

Snyder may not have been an environmental activist this time last year, but he sure sounds like one now. Whether he and his many allies will actually stop the Raven Underground Coal Mine remains to be seen, but clearly, he’s not going to give up.

For more information:

www.coalwatch.ca
www.theravenproject.ca
www.complianceenergy.com
www.wildernesscommittee.org

Source