|
January 24, 2003
Izok not needed for Kitikmeot
road-port, backers say
Proponents say Bathurst
project still needed to develop regions economy
CLICK MAP TO ENLARGE
The
section of proposed all-weather road on the mid-left part of this map, connecting
Lupin with Izok Lake, has been dropped for the foreseeable future.
(MAP COURTESY
OF THE BATHURST ROAD AND PORT PROJECT)
|
JIM
BELL
Backers of the Bathurst
Inlet Road and Port Project now say that the huge Izok Lake zinc-copper deposit
never was an essential, make-or-break ingredient of their plan.
Last week, the Canadian
Arctic Resources Committee said the road-port system, which would overlap the
calving grounds of the Bathurst caribou herd, may not be economically viable
without a connection to Izok Lake which is owned by the Inmet Mining
Corp.
CARC says the Department
of Indian and Northern Affairs should reconsider its support for the project,
and that any environmental review should be postponed until "the project
is clarified and its viability proven."
In December, road-port
proponents told regulators that theyve changed their plans, dropping an
80-km section of all-weather road between the Lupin mine and Izok Lake.
That reduces the scheme
to a single, 210-km stretch of all-weather road connecting a port on Bathurst
Inlet with the eastern shore of Contwoyto Lake.
But proponents insist that,
not only does their plan still make sense without Izok Lake as a centrepiece,
its still an essential step in the economic development of the Kitikmeot.
"Its obviously
not necessary for them [Inmet Mining] to be the anchor tenant," said Charlie
Lyall, the head of the Kitikmeot Corp., the Kitikmeot regions Inuit birthright
company.
Ian Pirie, Inmets
director of corporate development, said his firm had no influence on the decision
to cut the Izok Lake all-weather road connection from the first phase of the
Bathurst road-port project.
He said the company has
no problem with the move, and will continue to support the scheme.
Pirie said that world zinc
prices are too low for Inmet to consider development of Izok Lake. "If
you were to develop it on todays price, it would not be viable,"
Pirie said.
He said the Izok Lake project
also needs a transportation system, and that the company wants to wait until
its clear that the project will actually happen.
But he stressed neither
Inmet nor the mining industry initiated the idea.
"Charlie Lyall and
the Kitikmeot Corp. and Nuna Logistics, they came to us," Pirie said.
Lyall, whose firm, along
with Nuna Logistics, has been working on the Bathurst project since 1999, said
their purpose was always to find a better way of supplying fuel to Kitikmeot
communities, to the Ekati and Diavik diamond mines in the NWT, and to four other
proposed mines in the region.
"I think what needs
to be understood is that this is an economic development tool for us,"
Lyall said.
Lyall accused CARC of being
ignorant of Nunavuts social and economic realities, comparing the lobby
group to other environmental groups whose activism in the past nearly destroyed
world fur markets.
"None of these guys
has ever set foot up here, ever lived up here. They never have to go and console
the parents of a kid whos just committed suicide.... They never have to
do any of these things, and yet they sit back in these very posh offices in
Ottawa and Yellowknife and criticize the hell out of us. Let them come up here
and live up here and experience what were experiencing," Lyall said.
The Inuit of the Kitikmeot
are also worried about the environment, Lyall stressed, but they support the
project because it offers an economic future for their children.
"Of course, theres
concern about the environment. Were just as concerned," Lyall said.
But CARC and a variety
of other groups disagree with Lyall and other Kitikmeot leaders over the type
or environmental review that the project should receive.
CARC, the Government of
the Northwest Territories, and a group representing the tiny community of Bathurst
Inlet favour a full-blown environmental assessment conducted by the federal
government.
Know as a "Part 6"
review, such a process would have a wide scope and provide funding to interveners.
But project proponents
favour whats called a "Part 5" review conducted by the Nunavut
Impact Review Board, a public government body created by the Nunavut land claims
agreement.
A NIRB-run review wouldnt
provide any intervener funding, and would be more limited in scope.
"The thing that worries
me with a Part 6 is every little save-the-cockroach society of Saguenay will
be able to get funding to come and intervene. Its not going to help the
cause its going to delay the cause," Lyall said.
Indian Affairs Minister
Bob Nault has yet to announce what kind of environmental review will be applied
to the project. The issue has been sitting on his desk since July 8, 2002.
Its only after an
environmental review that proponents can apply for the necessary permits and
seek financing to pay for the project.
|