EDITORIAL PAGE — When fish meet miners

Something must be askew at the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO). The collapse of the East Coast fishery and the near decimation of West Coast salmon stocks have left a lot of Canadian fisheries officers with not a heck of a lot to do.

The DFO is still embroiled in debates over whether or not seals eat cod, and whether or not seal hunts are desirable. But these are political hot potatoes, and the cod may be all gone before scientists and fisheries officials agree on anything. Behind the scenes, however, officials are engaged in a lot of soul-searching as to what could have been done years ago to prevent the present crises. And, doubtless, many of DFO’s civil servants are wondering how long it will be before the government axe falls.

In the meantime, however, DFO officials appear to have accelerated the monitoring of all resource activity that has the potential to affect fish habitat. Not harsh weather, nor biting mosquitoes, nor harsh terrain can stop the determined DFO officer from this task, for, without it, his job may well be redundant.

Fortunately for DFO, there are still a number of new mines and exploration projects being developed in this country. And by all accounts, they are being closely monitored. In recent months, several mining companies were charged with infractions related to their exploration and development activities. BHP Minerals and Kennecott, for example, were each charged with violations that could result in hefty fines. Both companies are actively exploring and/or developing diamond projects in Canada’s North.

The charges could not come at a worse time for BHP, which, along with partner Dia Met Minerals, is well into an environmental review of its proposal to mine diamonds. Public hearings are under way, and it is likely the charges will present fodder for those opposed to mining activities in this region.

Meanwhile, in British Columbia, a proposal to mine the Kemess copper-gold deposit came under pressure when nine spawning trout were found in an area where a tailings dam was proposed. The proponent was then in the midst of complex negotiations to acquire the deposit from its owners, and the deal was held up until the fate of the nine fish was negotiated with federal officials. The issue has since been resolved and the project is moving forward, but it is surprising that the issue was not handled in a more co-operative manner.

The adversarial approach of some fisheries officers has long been a sore point with mining companies. Some executives have joked that the sight they most fear, outside of Victor Malarek and a camera crew from The Fifth Estate pursuing them down the street, is a couple of DFO officers waiting in their office with a handful of official documents.

This animosity does not exist because mining executives do not care about fish or fish habitat. Quite the contrary. Most believe that every effort should be made to carry out exploration, development and mining with as little impact on the natural environment as possible.

But sometimes the environment is disturbed, usually in a way that is minimal and temporary. Such is the nature of human activity. After all, none of us can claim to have zero impact on the environment. For proof of this, take a look at the garbage, paint cans and other deleterious elements that we use and store in our homes. So let’s stop being environmental hypocrites — and stop expecting resource industries to carry out their business with zero impact, as well.