Placer miners welcome new policy for Yukon

A new federal government policy governing placer-mining in the Yukon Territory has met with approval from the territory’s placer mining industry.

Released in mid-May, the Yukon Fisheries Protection Authorization resolves the conflicts between the three federal acts that govern the territory’s placer industry and gives legal certainty to miners. It took effect June 1.

The Dawson City Gold Show on May 28-29 was the first chance many miners had to look at and debate the new policy. Because of an early spring, many had been out on the creeks when it was released. While there were some concerns expressed about discharge standards and enforcement mechanisms, the consensus at the show was that the policy is a good one.

Until now, the Fisheries Act as a law of general application took precedence over the Northern Inland Waters Act and the Yukon Placer Mining Act. “In Ottawa, we think there’s the Fisheries Act, the Ten Commandments and the Constitution of Canada — in that order,” was the wry observation by Bill McKnight, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development.

Frank Taylor, president of the Klondike Placer Mines Association, noted that many miners technically had been operating illegally for years, especially under the Fisheries Act. As McKnight told delegates to the Gold Show, that makes it difficult to attract investment capital.

Miners until now had no single place to turn to for rules and enforcement. Each act had its own inspectors, and in some cases the acts conflicted. As a result, it was often difficult to achieve both optimum fish protection and workable conditions for placer mining.

Spurring the search for a solution was the “Alaska Scenario” which loomed darkly over the $65-million a year industry here. The Yukon’s next door neighbor took too long to implement a 1972 Congressional act that called for classifying all streams based on their use, and wound up in 1985 having to apply a standard to all streams that allowed only 0.2 millilitres of settleable solids per litre of water.

The result is that fewer than 600 people now work in the Alaska placer mining industry, contributing $80 million to the state economy — down from 2,500 people and $224 million prior to the new standards, according to Josh Moore, president of the Miners Advocacy Council of Alaska.

It was partly because of this that Yukon placer miners strongly resisted the implementation of quantitative discharge standards here. Instead, the plan was to allow water to settle for one hour before discharge. That was unacceptable to the fisheries department, and word was that the government was moving to tighten the guidelines.

An implementation review committee was formed last year of industry and government representatives to negotiate a compromise. The result is the new policy. Unlike the Alaskan experience, though, it seems the new policy will strengthen the industry because of the legal certainty and workable discharge standards it brings.

There are five main features to the document:

— It creates a stream classification system that divides Yukon waterways into four types: Type 1 (Salmon spawning), Type 2 (Salmon rearing), Type 3 (significant non-salmon populations) and Type 4 (no significant fisheries).

— It assigns discharge standards, using a settleable solid measure (it assumes 0.2 ml/l settleable solids is equivalent to 200 mg/l suspended sediment). No sediment discharge above natural background is allowed into Type 1 streams, with the standard rising to 0.2 ml/l for Type 2, 1.0 ml/l for Type 3 and 5.0 ml/1 for Type 4.

— It assigns the responsibility for enforcement to a new placer division within the Indian affairs and northern development department, which administers most federal affairs in the north.

— It orders discharges standards, stream classification, mining plans, rehabilitation plans and measures to offset the disruption of fish habitat to be part of the water licence, in effect creating a “one window” approach to licencing that addresses all regulatory needs.

— It maintains the review committee for a further three years as a monitoring force, with a mandate to complete a review of the policy for 1991. The committee will also identify placer research requirements, review proposed changes to the classification system and provide a forum for information exchange.

The committee, chaired by KPMA representative Al Kapty, has already shown it can work quickly. Classification problems identified within days of the policy’s release were dealt with last week, with favorable recommendations heading to McKnight for his final approval.

John Maissan, the Yukon government’s representative on the committee, said miners visiting the special placer policy booth at the Gold Show were optimistic about their future under the new regime.

“Most of the miners are saying, “I’m on a Type 4 and I’ll have no problems meeting those objectives. Many had more stringent levels in the past — to have millilitres and legal certainty, they’re very happy.

“We had expected a negative reaction, but the lack of one tells us it (the policy) is going over well.”

According to federal mineral development manager Al Waroway, most of the Yukon’s placer mines lie on Type 4 streams. The breakdown is: Type 1 — 12, Type 2 — 3, Type 3 — 19, Type 4 — 269. Three operations are on unclassified streams, and will have to adhere to Type 1 standards until classified.

McKnight told miners he hopes the new policy rights some old wrongs dealt the industry by the federal government. “I really believe there was a mistake made years ago by not recognizing what was taking place in your industry,” he said.

“I don’t think we’ll do it again — I’ll do whatever I can and (fisheries minister) Tom Siddon will too — to make sure.”