In the midst of an international inquiry into transboundary water pollution from southeast B.C. coal mines, Elk Valley Resources has submitted a revised proposal for new mining in the region.
Teck Resources, the previous owner of the coal mines, initially proposed the Fording River Extension Project five years ago. In 2023, the provincial government directed the company to submit a revised proposal following a dispute resolution process initiated by the Ktunaxa Nation Council, which opposed the project over the risk of “extraordinarily adverse effects.”
In the intervening years Teck shifted its focus to copper, selling its coal business in a US$9-billion deal to Swiss mining giant Glencore and two other companies. Glencore now holds a majority stake in Elk Valley Resources, which operates the four active coal mines in the area.
The revised project description for the Fording River expansion, which Elk Valley Resources submitted to B.C.’s Environmental Assessment Office last month, proposes a two-phase approach to developing a smaller mine, with a shorter lifespan, with plans to restore mined areas incrementally throughout operations rather than waiting until mine operations have ended. It also limits the risks from waste rock dumps to a creek that has so far been largely unaffected by coal mine pollution and incorporates additional water quality measures.
Coal from the Elk Valley mines is loaded onto trains for transport to the coast, then shipped overseas where it’s burned to make steel. Photo: Jesse Winter / The Narwhal
Simon Wiebe, mining policy and impacts researcher with the Kootenay-based conservation group Wildsight, said the changes to the Fording River extension proposal are largely positive.
“But at the end of the day, the mine hasn’t changed sufficiently for us to not oppose it at all,” he said. “They’re still knocking down an entire mountain.”
Ktunaxa Nation Council and Yaq̓it ʔa·knuqⱡi’it, one of four Ktunaxa First Nations in B.C., were involved in revisions to the mine proposal, Chris Stannell, Elk Valley Resources communication manager, said.
While Yaq̓it ʔa·knuqⱡi’it Nasuʔkin (Chief) Heidi Gravelle said the best case scenario would be for the mine expansion to be taken off the table, she supports moving the proposal into the next phase of the environmental assessment process.
“What are the other options? To end mining? It’s not going to happen. To make this someone else’s problem in a different area, different mountain?” she said in an interview.
Yaq̓it ʔa·knuqⱡi’it will continue to be actively involved throughout the environmental assessment process, she said. “These are our lands and we’re here to protect them, we’re here to guide them.”
Yaq̓it ʔa·knuqⱡiʾit Nasuʔkin (Chief) Heidi Gravelle says she remains concerned new mining would threaten high-elevation grasslands and water quality. Photo: Jesse Winter / The Narwhal
Gravelle said the nation understands there’s a need for resources, but development doesn’t have to happen the way it has in the past. “Roads are going to be built, schools are going to be built, mining’s going to happen — but does it have to be the way that it has been done historically? Absolutely not,” she said. “There’s a lot that can still be done in the environmental assessment process — there are still a lot of pieces that can be scaled back.”
New mining would destroy high-elevation grasslands, risk added water pollution woes
If approved as currently proposed, the Fording River extension would see new mountaintop-removal coal mining on Castle Mountain, just south of Elk Valley Resources’ existing Fording River Operations. The company says the expansion is necessary to maintain mine operations and sustain more than 1,500 jobs beyond the early 2030s to the early 2060s.
Under the revised proposal, the extension project would have a total footprint of 4,326 hectares, more than 10 times the size of Vancouver’s Stanley Park. About 2,295 hectares are within already permitted areas and include existing waste rock storage areas, a coal processing plant and a tailings storage facility. The new mining area at Castle Mountain, which is not yet permitted, is just over 2,000 hectares.
In another shift from the original proposal, Elk Valley Resources is now pitching a staged approach to the project. Phase one would involve construction from 2028 to 2031 with mine operations until 2053. Construction for phase two would begin in 2044, when phase one operations are set to decline, with phase two mining planned for 2046 to 2065.
A spokesperson for the Environmental Assessment Office said the next opportunity for public comment will be after the agency decides whether the project is ready to proceed through the environmental assessment process. Wiebe has urged the government to hold a second public comment period before that decision is made, noting the project has changed since consultations in 2023.
If the project does proceed, the next phase is process planning, during which the assessment office will engage with First Nations, stakeholders, experts and the public to determine how the assessment will be conducted and how provincial and First Nation processes and decision-making will align.
The Fording River mine expansion would see new mountaintop-removal coal mining on Castle Mountain. Map: Shawn Parkinson / The Narwhal
The Elk Valley has been heavily impacted by historic coal mining dating back 130 years, as well as extensive logging, a highway and rail corridor and the development of several communities. The Fording River extension would add to existing impacts. It would mean losing more high-elevation grasslands in the area, which offer important wintering grounds for bighorn sheep and forage for elk and deer, for instance. “This is irreplaceable habitat,” Wiebe said.
The massive piles of waste rock left over from the mining process, meanwhile, have been a source of water pollution for as long as coal has been mined from the Rocky Mountains of the Elk Valley. When the waste rock is exposed to rain and snow, naturally occurring minerals like calcite and selenium seep into the water, eventually flowing into nearby creeks and rivers.
While all living things need some amount of selenium, too much of it can be toxic. In fish, for instance, too much selenium can cause deformities and reproductive failure. Calcite, meanwhile, can solidify the loose gravel on the stream bed that fish rely on to create protective nests for their eggs.
Teck has invested more than $1.4 billion in water treatment to reduce water pollution from its mines and Glencore committed to continue ramping up treatment capacity when it took the mines over. Treatment facilities currently have the capacity to treat 77.5 million litres of water per day. According to the company, water treatment facilities are removing between 95 and 99 per cent of selenium from treated water. However, the facilities are not able to treat all contaminated water that flows downstream.
“[Elk Valley Resources] has made significant progress implementing the Elk Valley Water Quality Plan,” Stannell said in an emailed statement. “Selenium concentrations have stabilized and are now reducing downstream of treatment.”
Three more water treatment projects now under construction are expected to increase water treatment capacity by another 50 million litres per day by 2027, according to the company’s website.
Selenium levels downstream of the Elk Valley coal mines remain well above B.C.’s guideline of two parts per billion, which is meant to protect aquatic life. But the company is not required to get selenium levels this low in either the Fording or Elk rivers. The B.C. government set selenium targets for the Fording River at 57 parts per billion closer to the mines and 40 parts per billion farther downstream. In the Elk River, the province set a target of 19 parts per billion.
“As a British Columbian, it’s kind of embarrassing, to be honest, that we’re entertaining this discussion,” Wiebe said. “We have an international water pollution issue going on and we’re talking about actively making it worse.”
Westslope cutthroat trout is listed as a species of concern under the Species at Risk Act. In fish, selenium poisoning can cause deformities and reproductive failure. Photo: Jayce Hawkins / The Narwhal
Gravelle said the risks of added water pollution and the loss of high-elevation grasslands are major concerns for Yaq̓it ʔa·knuqⱡi’it. But she also worries about what happens if the company were to walk away. “Who’s going to pay for that mess that is up there?” she asked. “We see in other areas around the country where there are abandoned mines and things like that — nobody does.”
Late last month, the province released an updated Elk Valley Water Quality Plan, which aims for progressive improvements to water quality downstream of the mines. A spokesperson for the Ministry of Environment and Parks said “the updated plan strengthens B.C.’s regulatory role and provides a clear framework for how decisions are made that affect water quality, ensuring the Ktunaxa First Nations are included.”
It did not, however, strengthen selenium targets. “But it better prepares us to make these decisions going forward by providing guidance on the process for target review and amendment,” the spokesperson said.
Long-awaited international inquiry into Elk Valley coal mine pollution underway
Water pollution from the mines flows from the Elk River into Lake Koocanusa, a vast reservoir spanning the Canada-U.S. border, before coursing through Montana and Idaho in the Kootenai River. In both states there are long-standing concerns about the impact of the pollution on vulnerable fish species.
After more than a decade of pressure from the transboundary Ktunaxa Nation, which includes the four First Nations in B.C., the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes in Montana and the Kootenai Tribe of Idaho, the federal governments in the U.S. and Canada agreed to involve the International Joint Commission. The commission was established under the 1909 Boundary Waters Treaty to address intractable disputes over water between the two countries.
The commission convened a body of all affected governments within the region to develop an action plan to reduce the impacts of mine pollution on the watershed, as well as a two-year study board of experts and Indigenous Knowledge Keepers to better understand the pollution and its impact on people and other species. The study board’s interim report is due in September.
Meanwhile in Montana, the state is facing its own struggles over its selenium standard for Lake Koocanusa.
Between 2015 and 2020, a joint B.C.-Montana working group studied and monitored selenium contamination in the reservoir, with the intention that the two jurisdictions would adopt a single standard for the lake. In 2020, Montana moved forward on its own implementing a more stringent standard of 0.8 parts per billion. Five years later, B.C. is still considering a new standard for Koocanusa — for now it remains at two parts per billion.
But, Lincoln County, the Montana county that surrounds Koocanusa, is once again challenging the state’s standard, outlining concerns that overly restrictive limits could affect local industry, though Montana’s Department of Environmental Quality said back in 2020 that the standard would have no adverse economic impacts in the state.
In Montana, there are concerns about the risks to fish and other wildlife from contaminants that flow downstream from the Elk Valley coal mines. Photo: Jesse Winter / The Narwhal
“It befuddles me, really. I mean there are no sources of selenium in that basin within Montana — it’s coming from Canada and in terms of the benefits that we derive from the Elk Valley operations, it’s slim to nil,” Derf Johnson, deputy director of the Montana Environmental Information Center, an environmental advocacy group, said in an interview.
Johnson warned key Montana industries could be harmed by higher selenium, calling the challenge “a slap in the face to people that rely upon clean water to do their work.”
“We’re talking about outfitters and fishermen, which is really important business in Montana,” he said.
Johnson said he remains hopeful that the International Joint Commission process will be a good step towards addressing the pollution from the Elk Valley coal mines.
But he said considering new mining at this stage is “just throwing gasoline on the fire.”
“It’s tough to say this right now because of the current state of political affairs in the United States, but it’s about being a good neighbour in terms of making sure that our water quality is protected.”
