May 05 2009 » Media Releases
Election Survey: Candidates solid against Fish Farms and CBM but tankers, IPPs still divide
(Smithers, BC) Northwest BC candidates from all parties oppose coalbed methane and
fish farms but remain divided on Independent Power Projects and oil tanker traffic.
Thatʼs the finding of a recent survey conducted by Skeena Watershed Conservation
Coalition and Friends of Wild Salmon in the lead-up to the May 12 provincial election.
“The political landscape is pretty well defined: there is virtually zero support for either fish
farms or coalbed methane,” said Skeena Watershed Conservation Coalition executive
director Shannon McPhail. “However, some major differences between the candidates
remain, and we encourage voters to pay close attention to how they are responding to
other important environmental issues.”
The two organizations surveyed 10 candidates from four political parties in the ridings of
Stikine, North Coast and Skeena.
“The BC Liberal candidates have the thankless job of defending some very unpopular
projects that the government has supported,” said Pat Moss of Friends of Wild Salmon.
“For example, the BC Liberal candidates were the only ones not to oppose the Enbridge
plan for oil tankers on our coast, which we find deeply troubling given the known risks of
oil spills.”
The survey also asked candidates to put forward what they feel is the greatest green
economic opportunity in the Northwest. Responses ranged from bio-energy to food
security and wind power.
“We need representatives here in the Northwest who understand our communitiesʼ
values when it comes to clean water, wild salmon, and intact watersheds,” said McPhail.
“We encourage people to vote for the candidates they feel share their concerns when it
comes to these critical issues.”
30
Backgrounder attached
For more information, contact:
Shannon McPhail: (250) 842-2494
Pat Moss: (250)847-9693
Backgrounder
The following are the questions and responses from the Skeena Watershed
Conservation candidate survey.
Responses were received from the following candidates:
Stikine Riding:
Scott Groves, BC Liberal Party
Doug Donaldson, BC New Democratic Party
Roger Benham, BC Green Party
Skeena Riding:
Donny van Dyk, BC Liberal Party
Robin Austin, BC New Democratic Party
Anita Norman, BC Green Party
Mike Brousseau, BC Conservative Party
North Coast Riding:
Herb Pond, BC Liberal Party
Gary Coons, BC New Democratic Party
Lisa Girbav, BC Green Party
Groves: I support the current moratorium. It is has been ruled a federal jurisdiction, and thus a permanent ban would be the responsibility of the Federal representative.
Donaldson: Open net fish farms in our northern waters imperil our wild salmon runs in the Skeena and Bulkley systems. This is not an acceptable risk. I fully support the recommendations by the all-party Sustainable Aquaculture Committee that spent a considerable amount of time visiting northern communities interviewing local experts and also reviewing research on this topic worldwide. They recommended no open-net fish farms be established in our northern waters. The BC Liberals have refused to endorse the report even though Gordon Campbell was the one who established the committee. As your MLA I will push for the Sustainable Aquaculture Committeeʼs report to be adopted in full so we will never have open-net fish farms established in the mouth of the Skeena River as planned by the Liberals.
Benham: I support the moratorium.
Van Dyk: I support the current suspension of fish farms in northern waters. I would not support a permanent ban at this time because I do not feel we should close the door on potential new technologies that would not only increase fish stocks but also help to protect them.
Austin: Support.
Norman: I support the moratorium on fish farms. BC’s wild fish are at risk and runs are in decline. We need to do everything we can to help, not hinder wild fish stocks. We owe it to ourselves. We owe it to the First Nations. We owe it to future generations. We owe it to wildlife and ecosystems.
Pond: I support the moratorium on open pen fish farms in northern waters. Would leave open the opportunity for industry, communities and environmental groups to work together to develop techniques such as closed systems that satisfy concerns for wild salmon and the environment. If this can be accomplished First Nations and other coastal communities could benefit from badly needed jobs.
Coons: I support the moratorium and a permanent ban and have been fighting for this for 6 years
Girbav: I am firmly against fish farms and would like to see a permanent ban on them in British Columbia. It is ecologically unsustainable to farm carnivorous fish. Fish farms are full of sea lice as well as full of chemicals. However I do support other forms of mariculture such as kelp farming and shellfish farming (such as clams, mussels, etc.)
Brousseau: Yes, I do not support it, they taste terrible, get them out of the rivers.
Question 2: Do you support or oppose Enbridge’s plan to bring oil supertankers into northern BC’s inside coastal waters?
Groves: I support the public consultation and environmental review process. Also we need to pursue improved shipping safety whether this project goes ahead or not.
Donaldson: We have to judge development proposals first and foremost as to the risks and benefits they bring to people living here. With the Enbridge plan we assume all the risks for very little benefits. Using Enbridgeʼs own numbers there will be possibly 40 full-time jobs in Kitimat when the pipeline is completed. Contrast this with the certainty that there will be oil spills not only from the pipeline but from the crude oil supertanker traffic on our inland, northern coastal waters. Look at the horrendous results of the Exxon Valdez disaster. These spills could well be the final nail in the coffin for our wild salmon in the Skeena and Bulkley Rivers. The Wetʼsuwetʼen do not support the Enbridge pipeline on their traditional territories. I stand with their position on the project. The Liberals are pushing for oil tanker traffic. The NDP fully endorses the existing moratorium on crude oil supertanker traffic in our coastal waters and that is what Iʼll be fighting for on your behalf in Victoria.
Benham: I oppose Enbridge’s plan.
Van Dyk: I support economic development so long as it doesnʼt harm our environment. The Enbridge proposal has not made clear all of the details surrounding the pipelines and therefore I cannot comment much further on the project. That being said, a full BC and Canadian environmental assessment will need to take place and the project will have to meet some of the most stringent regulations anywhere in the world.
Austin: Oppose.
Norman: I oppose the Enbridge pipeline. It poses too great a risk to the sensitive and pristine ecosystem that it would be travelling through. The number of jobs it intends to create is definitely not worth the risk that it poses. It is time we shift our focus from oil and gas to sources of renewable energy that don’t contribute to climate change and ruin our ecosystems.
Pond: I believe the Enbridge pipeline project will live or die on whether or not the proponent is able to satisfy the concerns and aspirations of First Nations along pipelineʼs route, including a route to bring tankers into Kitimat. The review processes that are underway should be comprehensive and well
resourced. I will be respectful and not prejudge the outcome of dialogue between Communities and the proponent. First Nations and other communities have recently reached agreements for the construction of a natural gas pipeline from Prince George to Kitimat. I respect the decisions of the First Nations involved in that process.
Coons: I oppose bringing in crude oil tankers into the North coast as do the majority of my constituents.
Girbav: I oppose the pipeline project from Alberta to Kitimat. Like anything made by humans, eventually it will fail. We are destined to see leaks in the pipeline. If the pipeline was built, we would also see increased tanker traffic in the North Coast region, which may lead to a coastal oil spill. Increased tanker traffic will also disrupt precious whale habitat near Hartley Bay, which can lead to ship strikes, sound pollution and toxic contamination.
Brousseau: Big business is pushing real hard to make sure this goes through. More than likely it will. But what is the Gov’t setting down to protect the streams and the oceans to make sure that we do not damage our future and our environment. It is very important the safeguards are built in before any
supertankers or pipelines go into effect. It is our future at stake!
Groves: I think the potential Suskwa power project is a very promising opportunity for utilizing pine beetle wood and creating jobs in the Hazeltons.
Donaldson: The one green economy opportunity in our constituency that I have worked on extensively in the past 8 years is local food production. Supporting local food systems and sustainable agriculture means increased local employment, less leakage of local dollars and significant carbon savings
especially in transportation. A recent study of the Smithers Farmerʼs Market showed huge savings in food miles and carbon emissions when a person buys local produce. A great example is garlic. Buying it from a producer at the farmerʼs market versus the imported brand from a supermarket means 250 times less carbon consumed and emitted in growing and transportation. The NDP supports increased resources for local food production, a buy local program, food security programming, and more resources for farmerʼs markets. I will also actively work to increase farmgate sales of local beef – something the BC Liberals made illegal. Improving farmgate sales enables more local people to make a living while reducing our carbon footprint associated with having to ship in beef from far away locations.
Benham: Most promising green opportunity: Growing food, increasing transit, selective logging and secondary manufacturing such as furniture, wind power.
Van Dyk: I consider independent power production to be a very promising green economy. These opportunities include wind energy, bioenergy, run of river, and solar energy – just to name a few.
Austin: Reforestation, Biofuel
Norman: With proper, stringent environmental assessments in place, I think the Skeena riding has a lot of potential to create renewable energy through its vast resources including geothermal, wind, solar and ocean. That way we can really shift our focus from oil and gas towards clean energy.
Pond: Green Economy is a broad concept meaning different things to different people. Prince Rupert is pinning its economic future on port developments. These developments will require the generation of additional electricity. Power generation fueled by wind or tide offer construction jobs in the short- term and the carbon free electricity that will support long-term port jobs. In addition, container terminals in Prince Rupert are virtually truck free compared to other west coast ports in Canada and the US. Being new, the facilities in Prince Rupert use the most fuel efficient equipment. Cargo switching to our northern ports from southern ports will have an overall positive environmental impact over the status quo.
Coons: I believe it’s taking advantage of wind but it must be based under the public good and not for private interests
Girbav: I feel that green infrastructure will be an asset to the North Coast riding. I would like to see the province get off oil and gas. If we invest in a renewable energy source such as windmills, solar energy or geothermal energy, we will see our region become sustainable. We could create jobs for citizens of the community as well as stimulate the economy when buying the materials necessary to build from local suppliers. Green infrastructure is good for the environment, good for the people and good for the economy.
Brousseau: Bio-energy
Question 4: Do you support or oppose coalbed methane drilling in the Sacred Headwaters?
Groves: I support the current moratorium, and I do not think it should be removed without agreement of the community and it being proven that it will have no adverse affect on the salmon. Like the NDP, I do not think any coal bed project should go ahead without full public consultation and environmental
assessment.
Donaldson: Coalbed methane is not an appropriate development in the Sacred Headwaters. It is a technology that has never been established in salmon-bearing watersheds. Why should we let them experiment on such a grand scale in our own backyard in such an ecologically sensitive area? The
Liberals granted Shell tenure to an area of 800,000 square acres for coalbed methane exploration and development in the Sacred Headwaters and the companies plans could mean 10,000 well heads in addition to the connecting pipelines and road infrastructure. The impact on fish, wildlife and the intact ecosystems will be irreversible. There are other, longer-lasting and less intrusive benefits that the Sacred Headwaters can provide. I attended a community meeting on this issue in Iskut in June and I support the efforts of the Tahltan who donʼt support this development. We must not allow coalbed methane development in the Sacred Headwaters or in the Telkwa watershed for that matter.
Benham: I oppose coalbed methane extraction.
Van Dyk: I support the current, temporary suspension of exploration activity in the Northwest to allow for further consultation with First Nations and other communities. I believe that development of coalbed methane in the future should only take place so long as our environment is protected.
Austin: Oppose
Norman: I oppose coalbed methane drilling in the Sacred Headwaters.
Pond: I support the current in moratorium of coalbed methane drilling in the “Sacred Headwaters. Again, I believe First Nations and communities must be effectively engaged in processes involving major projects. Their concerns and aspirations must be accommodated.
Coons: I support the Tahltan & the many concerned citizens in their opposition to coalbed methane drilling in the Sacred Headwaters
Girbav: I strongly oppose coal bed methane drilling in the sacred headwaters. There are no benefits to the environment. A lot of people strongly oppose coal bed methane drilling and I feel that there is no need to go against what the people want for their region. There needs to be local control over what happens in a region, rather than centralized decisions coming from Vancouver or Victoria.
Brousseau: In the North there is no need. I do not support this in the North.
Question 5: Do you support or oppose the current government’s approach to Independent Power Projects (IPPs)?
Groves: I support the current approach. I think the recently completely project in Atlin is a great example of these projects. It is wholly owned by the Tlingit providing them with a dependable revenue source, and it takes the community off of diesel generation, preventing the burning of over 3,000 litres
of Diesel a day.
Donaldson: I agree with former Social Credit cabinet minister Rafe Mair who describes the BC Liberalʼs approach to IPPs as a wholesale sell-off of a public resource that will result in environmental devastation and higher power prices. Some run-of-the-river projects are fine and could be beneficial. But the large-scale BC Liberal approach is poorly planned and poorly thought out. Tellingly, California has said that the power produced by the large scale IPPs planned for Bute Inlet do not meet their green energy standards because of the impact they have on the environment. I support community controlled IPPs where we have public oversight of a public resource – our rivers.
Benham: I oppose the current approach to Independent Power Projects
Van Dyk: I fully support the BC Liberal governmentʼs approach with respect to IPPs. The private sector can supplement our public Hydro supply through innovative, small-scale, clean power projects. By issuing competitive calls for power, BC Hydro is able to transfer risk to the private sector and
ensure that the most cost-effective, environmentally sound projects move forward, helping to keep electricity rates low.
Austin: Oppose
Norman: It is apparent that the current government’s priority in their approach to IPPs is not working towards the benefit British Columbians, regional communities, or BC Hydro. British Columbians will experience rate hikes, regional communities have no say in what happens to their rivers, and BC
Hydro has been cut off from developing any new power generation making them more and more reliant on Independent Power Producers. On top of this, there will likely be devastating effects on the wild fisheries as well as riparian ecosystems. I don’t think this is what British Columbian’s want. Until a more democratic system is in place (i.e. Bill 30 is repealed) and more stringent environmental assessments are required for all IPPs, not just ones that are greater than 50 MW, I do not support the current government’s approach to IPPs.
Pond: Like many of the mainstream environmental organizations I support the current governmentʼs approach to Independent Power. I am encouraged that so many First Nations and communities are involved. Having been the Mayor of Prince Rupert for six years I realize that processes are not always perfect and can almost always be improved. I look forward to rural municipalities and First Nations communities creating local jobs and receiving revenues from electric generation that up until recently all went south to feed BC Hydro.
Coons: I oppose the gvt’s approach to IPP’s and strongly support a moratorium of new ones until we have a supply and demand analysis done on our energy needs and proof that these projects can be done without impact to our wild salmon
Girbav: I oppose the current government’s approach to Independent Power Projects because the current run of the river power generation dams are too large and are having to big of an impact on our environment. I do support IPPs however they need to be environmentally friendly in every way possible. The current run of the river power projects are impacting grizzly bears, mountain goats and seabirds to name a few, from increased mountain activity (blasting, increased vehicle traffic and power lines). In California they don’t call it “green” energy, so why do we call it “green” here?
Brousseau: Good thing if regulated by a government that cares for our natural resources
Question 6: If elected, what will you do to help ensure a viable future for Skeena wild salmon?
Groves: I would pursue all possible avenues to project the Skeena salmon and make sure that all projects that take into account what impacts they might have on the salmon.
Donaldson: I believe we need a comprehensive approach that includes real analysis and public consultation around development issues so that the people living here, and dependent upon wild salmon for a wide variety of reasons, have the most say over the future of the resource. This comprehensive approach needs to include not only matters under provincial jurisdiction, such as habitat protection, but also under federal jurisdiction such as selective commercial fisheries. I intend as your MLA to work closely with my federal counterpart, Nathan Cullen, to provide a solid, unified front, that will protect our wild salmon by providing positive solutions while opposing unsatisfactory development plans like coal bed methane, fish farms and oil tankers.
Benham: Close all at sea fish farms, require them to be contained on land. Seriously study allowable fish catches and allocation. Err to safe rather than sorry.
Van Dyk: As someone who was born and raised in Terrace, I believe one of our natural treasures is our wild salmon. I will be a strong advocate both in the Legislature and around the caucus table to ensure our Skeena wild salmon are protected.
Austin: Would work hard to ensure that any industrial activity that would endanger our Wild Salmon not be permitted in the watershed where our Wild Salmon exists.
Norman: I will ensure that the northern waters are kept clean and in good shape for all species, including wild salmon, that depend on the them. I will invest in restoration where streams have been negatively impacted. I will ensure that any development that is to take place on or near any stream undergoes stringent environmental assessment and until this is in place, I will work towards keeping the moratorium on fish farms and instilling a moratorium on IPPs.
Pond: On the North Coast healthy salmon stocks are vital for our economic and spiritual well-being. If elected I will continue to work with local fishing organization for reasonable access to salmon. There will be no reasonable access, if the stocks are not healthy. There is not any one thing. We must try to
do better with everything we do concerning salmon and salmon habitat. There must be a balance, but the balance must favour the salmon.
Coons: If elected we would implement the recommendations of the aquaculture committee including the transition to closed containment in the next 5 years and we would strengthen the salmon protection act and re-establish programs that support the return salmon and steelhead throughout BC.
Girbav: I would fight to strengthen the environmental assessment process to include watershed-based assessments and to ensure it takes into consideration cumulative impacts from all activities and proposed projects. I would also fight to ban oil tanker traffic from BC’s coastal waters.
Brousseau: Promote hatcheries that work with public counsel.
