top of page


Many of the members of CCQL attended the Thursday 8th December 2016 teleconference organised by MPMC, to answer further questions.

I was firstly extremely disappointed that questions from the last teleconference were being answered again.

There were 6 new slides covering Pollution, BAT and IDZ.

I took copies of the slides and have included them, but I cant upload them here. Please email if you would like a copy.

I also continue to be astounded at the methods used to control this teleconference, a number of our member have reported being muted by the organiser, so that they were unable to ask questions. I have checked with Go to Meeting and this is something an organiser is capable of doing. When one of our member did ask a question they were rather abruptly told that " questions were not allowed and to mute their phone". This member and several others left.

I have the feed back below from these members.

An email sent to a Golders employee Lee Nickl

Can you confirm that you were a participant in last night’s teleconference call? I ask you this as a fellow R.B.Bio. I also respect you and the work you have done on this project for the MPMC however a complete introduction of host participants is an expected courtesy at the very least. I also agree with Doug that the MPMC are bullying the community and they have lost their moral compass on this aftermath of the largest mining disaster in Canadian history. We have no means of addressing the tomes of information provided and the community is being advised that this is the best way forward…..for the mining company.

I will not be attending any additional teleconference calls such as last night and continue to be treated with contempt with no ability to have dialogue on these important issues. The process is a sham, however I will be attending any and all future public meetings in an effort to hold the MPMC accountable and the community would welcome MPMC management to attend as well. We were assured in the late 1990s that no water would leave the site as a permit condition and as a community we welcomed the MPMC into our backyard on that condition…..that has all changed for very obvious reasons and our community and the local environment bears the cost of this recklessness.

They have driven a wedge into our community and they have intentionally severed any goodwill between the community of Likely and the Quesnel Lake residents and as a response this is evidenced by the recent Likely Chamber of Commerce position and the recent organization of the Concerned Citizens of Quesnel Lake. We are their neighbours and we’re good people, but they have lost any social license to operate in our backyard until many fences are mended. Nobody looks after a watershed better than those who live within it. How the MPMC addressed the aftermath will be remembered long after the disaster itself. What a sad and tragic story this has become and what a legacy the MPMC is leaving behind.


" To keep the language simple and, as often used in this evenings Teleconference presentation re Mount Polley Mine Effluent Discharge into Quesnel Lake, ... IN LAYMANS TERMS (and simply put), the basic point is, why do you (Mount Polley Mine) presume to use my back yard (Quesnel Lake) to rationalize your polluted mine discharge!! Your rationalization does not (IN LAYMANS TERMS) CUT IT standing on it's own. Your reliance on your interpretation of " regulations" and studies/reports chosen to add credibility to your conclusions MUST BE CHALLANGED AND THOROUGHLY VETTED THROUGH AN INDEPENDENT CREDIBLE THIRD PARTY, ENGAGED BY THE COMMUNITY AT THE EXPENSE OF MOUNT POLLEY MINING CORP.. Though time consuming, I can not conclude the community will ever accept this monologue as acceptable. The original DISASTER has been amplified by the lack of credible action re the pollution lying on the bottom of the lake and continuously being dumped into its waters."


Another email sent to Lee Nickl of Golders

Hey Lee,

I see you were listening in…so what did you think of that farce? Hopefully you (Golder) are not being tainted by Imperial Metals interpretation of appropriate social and environmental standards!! I don’t how you can hold your nose while all that BS is being shovelled!! They cut an attendee off, and had me on mute so I could not talk if I had wanted to, and obviously they did not let anyone else ask questions??? MPMC is cherry-picking every possible excuse they can find to operate at the lowest possible environmental standard they can possibly get away with.

You know we are totally opposed to continuing discharge in the lake, and yet we cannot get all the WQ & MPMC operating data we need to build a “science-based” technical response, as apparently required by MoE and MEM. Imperial Metals certainly doesn’t care about what they have already done to Quesnel Lake, and nobody appears to be actually studying the current effects of what has happened to QL, and yet a monumental mistake of a lifetime decision is about to be forced on us and the formerly pristine Quesnel Lake!

It is hard to imagine that Imperial Metals actually claims to be part of the Mining Association of Canada TSM program (“transparency…communities…minimize the impact of our operations on the environment…responsive to community priorities, needs and interests”, what a laugh!), and of course they used Golder as their “independent” 3rd party reviewer. In discussions I had with MAC following the breach, they actually refused to come out and meet the people who were directly impacted by Imperial Metals past operating practises that led to the worst mining disasters ever in Canada (just read the Chief Mine Inspectors Report). As far as I can see, Imperial Metals doesn’t have a single board member or senior executive with environmental science/regulatory experience, and the “special committee for Mount Polley” consists of an accountant, a lawyer and P.Eng (geologist?), which I guess is reflected in how they are proceeding. Their engagement with the community and care about the environment STINKS.

You were heavily involved in the consultation process in 2014/2015, including the selection of the “temporary” discharge, so how do you think Imperial Metals is doing now? I think it would be a good time for Brian Kynoch to come back and meet the "community of interest", don’t you?

Why did I address this to you? Because I found you honest, upfront and trustworthy, definitely not the disdain and contempt with which we are being treated now. I am also curious as to your role and why you would be quietly listening in on this farce teleconference? I sure hope that MoE does not seriously count this as "community consultation”.

Featured Posts 
Recent Posts 
bottom of page