News
Oct 03, 2011
Wild-salmon rivers should be considered ‘no-go zones’
By NIKKI SKUCE AND KAREN TAM WU, Special to The Sun
With another round of pressure to open up trade with Asia and treat British Columbia as just another gateway, maybe it’s time to import an idea from the world’s largest democracy.
India has created “no-go zones” for coal mining. These areas are forests and other ecosystems that have been set aside for protection from coal mining. When it comes to energy development in this province, we should be looking at something similar.
In the northwest of the province, three major wild salmon rivers are born — the Skeena, Stikine and Nass. These critical watersheds are known as the Sacred Headwaters. The vast alpine landscape, territory of the Tahltan First Nation, is also home to grizzly bears, caribou and moose. There are very few places of its kind left in the world.
Royal Dutch Shell would like to turn the pristine Sacred Headwaters into an ugly maze of coal bed methane gas wells and roads. It’s no wonder first nations, downstream communities and concerned citizens from around the world have protested Shell’s project. Is it truly worth fracking up the land and three major wild salmon rivers for gas that industry analysts admit is in a glut and offers few temporary jobs for the local community? While the B.C. government has placed a temporary moratorium on Shell activity in the province, the Sacred Headwaters are a prime candidate to become a no-go zone. No-go for Shell, of course. It would remain a stunning destination for the rest of us.
Following the Skeena River downstream, Enbridge proposes to build dual pipelines from the oilsands to Kitimat, crossing the Skeena watershed. This project would pose serious threats to one of the world’s healthiest salmon runs. Skeena salmon is valued at $110 million annually, and is the source of livelihoods for many communities in the region.
At the pipeline’s end, Enbridge’s project would introduce 225 oil supertankers each year to B.C.’s north coast for the first time. As most British Columbians know, the province is also home to the Great Bear Rainforest. The Great Bear is an international treasure — home to magnificent cedar trees and the Spirit, or Kermode bear. Its waters are teeming with life — humpback, orca and fin whales all feed there. Coastal first nations have invested millions of dollars into a sustainable economy that would be threatened by a tanker spill.
British Columbians understand how precious it is — and how stormy conditions would be for huge tankers. Close to 80 per cent of the province supports an oil tanker ban for Canada’s north Pacific coast. Coastal first nations have declared an oil tanker ban in their traditional waters, which include Enbridge’s proposed routes.
This part of the world needs a no-go zone for oil tankers. An oil spill in the region would destroy the coast and its diverse ecosystems for generations. And for what? To have British Columbia act as a throughput for unrefined oilsands to reach Asian markets?
We should be exchanging ideas and technologies with Asia to help us all transition off fossil fuels. We have something to learn from China, since it is now the world’s largest producer of windmills and solar panels. We shouldn’t be building yesterday’s technologies for low returns at such a high cost. Destroying global assets like the Sacred Headwaters and Great Bear Rainforest is short-sighted and puts at risk our own claim of B.C. as “the best place on Earth.” Adopting the idea of no-go zones from India to protect our sacred spaces makes sense.
And if our government won’t take the leadership, then the companies should adhere to the cries of “no” in B.C., and quietly “go.”
Nikki Skuce is the senior energy campaigner at ForestEthics. Karen Tam Wu is the senior conservation campaigner at ForestEthics.
© Copyright © The Vancouver Sun