Prosperity Gold-Copper Mine Project

Attachment Government of Canada Response to the Report of the Federal Review Panel for the Taseko Mines Limited's Prosperity Gold-Copper Mine Project in British Columbia Réponse du gouvernement du Canada au rapport du Comité d'examen du fédéral : Projet de mine d'or et de cuivre Prosperity de Taseko Mines Ltd. de la Colombie-Britannique

• Prosperity Gold-Copper Mine Project
• Author: Administration
• Reference number: 2367
• Submitted: 2010-11-02
• Government of Canada Response to the Report of the Federal Review Panel for the Taseko Mines Limited's Prosperity Gold-Copper Mine Project in British Columbia The Project Taseko Mines Limited (Taseko) proposes to develop a high-tonnage open pit gold-copper mine (the Project) to be located 125 km southwest of Williams Lake, British Columbia (B.C.). The mineral deposit is described as being located 1 km north of Teztan Biny (Fish Lake) and 10 km northeast of lower Dasiqox Biny (Taseko Lake) and in the Teztan Yeqox (Fish Creek) watershed. The mine site would be located on a 35 km² parcel of land. The Project would be carried out in three phases, a construction phase (2 years), an operational phase (20 years) and closure phase (up to 24 years). As proposed, the Project would involve an open-pit mine that would produce gold and copper over a 20-year operating life with a production capacity of approximately 70,000 tonnes per day. The Project would include five main elements: mine site, access road, transmission line, rail load-out facility and fish and fish habitat compensation works. The mine site would include an open pit, a camp, an onsite mill, support infrastructure, waste rock stockpiles, a tailings storage facility, and typical large-scale open pit mining equipment, including a primary crusher and overland conveyor. Access to the mine site would be via a 2.8 km access road which would be extended from an existing road. Electricity would be provided via a 125 ...

Attachment Response to the Reuter family children regarding their questions and comments on the project (From Taseko Mines Limited to Justin, Jesse, Kelsey & Kara Reuter)

• Prosperity Gold-Copper Mine Project
• Author: Administration
• Reference number: 2332
• Submitted: 2010-04-30
• Response to the Reuter family children regarding their questions and comments on the project (From Taseko Mines Limited to Justin, Jesse, Kelsey & Kara Reuter)
• Attachment included
• file:///C|/Documents%20and%20Settings/mckeagep/My%20Documents/Pr...ake%20Lodge%20concerning%20their%20health%20%20future%20here.htm Subject: FW: Questions from the Children from Taseko Lake Lodge concerning their health & future here Attachments: Beece Creek flows.pdf From: Roderick Bell-Irving [mailto:RoderickBell-Irving@tasekomines.com] To: sigfried Reuter Cc: Prosperity Review [CEAA] Subject: RE: Questions from the Children from Taseko Lake Lodge concerning their health & future here Hi Justin, Jesse, Kelsey & Kara, Thanks for your interest in the Prosperity Mine and I apologize for the delay in responding. I have been rather busy of late. I am writing this in response to your letter that you sent to me and the federal Panel reviewing our proposed Prosperity Project. In your e-mail you stated: “Water levels and potential flooding: Seeing as how Taseko Mines has neglected to consider our family’s well being and safety so far and no one has ever been around at Spring melt off or seen the high water level... and in your EIS you expect the water levels to increase through your 'lake' and then down the Beece Creek....” You then asked the question: “Will you be reinforcing the south bank above the lodge yard and ensuring our family's safety and the continued safety of our home & buildings?” The simple answer to your question is no, we are not planning to reinforce the south bank but we have considered your family’s safety and the continued safety of your home and buildings.. Taseko Mines will not be reinforcing the south bank above the lodge yard because any water that the Mine puts in Beece Creek will not make the water level of the creek rise very much at all, and ...

Attachment Comments on the project (From Nicole Hamel to Review Panel)

• Prosperity Gold-Copper Mine Project
• Author: Administration
• Reference number: 2339
• Submitted: 2010-04-30
• Comments on the project (From Nicole Hamel to Review Panel)
• Attachment included
• -----Original Message----- From: Nicole Hamel <email address removed> To: Prosperity Review [CEAA] Cc: hillj@parl.gc.ca Subject: Please stop the Mine My apologies if this is the second email you received from me. Dear Mr. Connelly, Mr. Klassen and Ms. Morin Please consider stopping the Taseko Mines project out of Williams Lake. It will bring devastating and irreversible environmental damage to the land. I have read the DFO reports provided on the CEAA website, as well as the document by Vimeo about the 'Tsilhqot'in peoples' unanimous rejection of Taseko Mines Ltd.'s proposal to drain Teztan Biny (Fish Lake) in order to stockpile mining waste'. There are too many variables that cannot be predicted, such as the risk of the lowered water level of Prosperity Lake which could bring a devastating fish kill, or the affected riparian area. The pit lake and tailing storage facility will cause harm to nearby wildlife, and the people who depend on these animals for their livelihood. The Xeni Gwet'n have not agreed to this proposed mine, and I do not understand how the federal and provincial government can ignore this fact. I am a biology teacher, and in my former profession I worked as a fisheries biologist. I have travelled extensively through the area proposed by the mine, and I am gravely concerned that this mine may proceed. British Columbia is an amazingly province and people from around the world come here to visit. I am proud when I hear them say it is beautiful and they appreciate the wilderness. I realize this would be an economic boost for our province, but we need to find a better way. Tourism also provides economic properity. Let us keep our land pristine for ...

Attachment Comments on socio-economics related to the project (From Kelly Reuter, Taseko Lake Outfitters to Review Panel)

• Prosperity Gold-Copper Mine Project
• Author: Administration
• Reference number: 2319
• Submitted: 2010-04-30
• Comments on socio-economics related to the project (From Kelly Reuter, Taseko Lake Outfitters to Review Panel)
• Attachment included
• file:///C|/Documents%20and%20Settings/mckeagep/My%20Documents/Prosperity/Hearings/hearing%20registry/apr%2030/reuter.htm Subject: FW: *****SPAM***** Comments: Zero Social & Economic Accountability for local people Attachments: Response to Undertaking U-21.pdf; ATT1367829.htm; Response to Taseko Mines Answers.pages.zip; ATT1367830.htm From: sigfried Reuter <email address removed> Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 2:48 PM To: Prosperity Review [CEAA] Subject: *****SPAM***** Comments: Zero Social & Economic Accountability for local people Good day Panel, As this is the day for social economic concerns and presentations, along with the letter and attachments below for our concerns & comments in regards to the proposed mine I would like to add a few further thoughts. As already noted along with Taseko Mines complete misunderstanding of our needs for healthy and sustainable living here at the lodge & their admitted lack of knowledge as to what is required to operate a wilderness lodge is their continued resistance to address their negative overlaps of our tenured work areas. The footprint of the proposed mine plan including the natural grass meadows south east of the Fish Lake is some of the best moose habitat in the area. This area is covered under Sig's guide outfitter certificate & license. The same area is within our tenured commercial recreation or GAT (guided adventure tourism) tenure as we have mentioned repeatedly but without an honest response from Taseko Mines in regards to the obvious destruction of the area and our resulting loss of work area, trails, grazing and lodge based routes. Taseko has thrown in a token for us as to their mitigation of the completely flooded grasslands and ...

Attachment Comments on the project (From Candace J. Lucas to Panel Secretariat)

• Prosperity Gold-Copper Mine Project
• Author: Administration
• Reference number: 2295
• Submitted: 2010-04-30
• Comments on the project (From Candace J. Lucas to Panel Secretariat)
• Attachment included
• file:///C|/Documents%20and%20Settings/mckeagep/My%20Documents/Prosperity/Hearings/hearing%20registry/apr%2030/lucas.htm Subject: FW: My Concerns RE: Prosperity From: CANDACE LUCAS <email address removed> Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 9:06 AM To: Prosperity Review [CEAA] Subject: My Concerns RE: Prosperity I note that in their "official project impact statement" Taseko gives a very short section to the"First Nations". It can be found in "Volume Eight", preceding "Additional Requirements". In that section, Taseko admits that they behan implementing it's "First Nations Engagement and Consultation Strategy" in 1993. (Page 11 of the report), but what they don't mention is that the First Nations have unanimously opposed the project, with good reasons. The FN, rightly, do not care about the financial gain that Taseko stands to acquire. What they are concerned about is the sustainability of the land. This is because future generations depend on clean water, biodiversity, and a healthy watershed, NOT the status of Taseko Mines' current TSX standing. Copper and Gold have uses, granted. But I also would like to suggest that we start recycling previously mined products, and put a cap on new mines. At the risk of sounding alarmist, it is time to start respecting the land we live on. Sincerely, Candace Lucas Prince George, BC Candace J. Lucas Financial Services <contact information removed> file:///C|/Documents%20and%20Settings/mckeagep/My%20Docu...rosperity/Hearings/hearing%20registry/apr%2030/lucas.htm [4/30/2010 12:39:25 PM] Local Disk file:///C|/Documents%20and%20Settings/mckeagep/My%20Documents/Prosperity/Hearings/hearing%20registry/apr%2030/lucas.htm

Attachment Comments on the project (From Val Reimer to Panel Secretariat)

• Prosperity Gold-Copper Mine Project
• Author: Administration
• Reference number: 2296
• Submitted: 2010-04-30
• Comments on the project (From Val Reimer to Panel Secretariat)
• Attachment included
• -----Original Message----- From: Val Reimer <email address removed> Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 8:42 AM To: Prosperity Review [CEAA] Subject: My concerns Hello I realize this is very last minute, but I hope it's not too late to submit my concern about the project. My primary concern is with the First Nations in the area. They are making valid complaints and I think that it is time that we listen to them. Primarily, once those fish are gone, they can not be replaced. Some of the fish in the area are genetically distinct. It may seem like a small price to pay (killing those fish) to Taseko, but to many of us, in the big picture, it is bigger than a few hundred jobs and short term financial gain. From a fishery expert's perspective: "It's estimated at 85,000 genetically distinct fish in Fish Lake and another 80,000 in Little fish Lake and other connected streams and wetlands. A few will be salvaged to become broodstock in a fish hatchery, the rest are goners." -Andrea Battistel, Environmental Consultant, Calgary Alberta Please, please hear my voice, I strongly oppose this project, and I plan to protest it until the end. Val Reimer

Attachment Comments on the project (From Val Reimer to Panel Secretariat)

• Prosperity Gold-Copper Mine Project
• Author: Administration
• Reference number: 2338
• Submitted: 2010-04-30
• Comments on the project (From Val Reimer to Panel Secretariat)
• Attachment included
• file:///C|/Documents%20and%20Settings/mckeagep/My%20Documents/Prosperity/Hearings/hearing%20registry/may%201/reimer.htm Subject: FW: *****SPAM***** PROSPERITY REVIEW PANEL CONCERN LETTER From: Val Reimer <email address removed> To: hillj@parl.gc.ca Subject: *****SPAM***** PROSPERITY REVIEW PANEL CONCERN LETTER Dear Mr. Hill I am writing to voice my concern about the "Prosperity" project, which, as you know, is in it's final stage of the approval process. I am trained as a biologist, and am currently working in an elementary school. As such, my primary concern is with the biodiversity in the watershed. It is estimated that 160,000 (some genetically DISTINCT) fish will be killed for this project. Once those lakes, watersheds, and more specifically, fish, are gone, they can not EVER be replaced. It may seem like a small price to pay (killing those fish) to Taseko, but to many of us, in the big picture, it is bigger than a few hundred jobs and short term financial gain. I am concerned for the future generations, and please don't dismiss this concern as idealistic. The small children I work with every day will NOT benefit in the future from another copper mine IN ANY WAY. What we must do to maintain their earth is look after the environment, starting with the fisheries, habitats, and forests. The solution to the financial / copper / gold / greed problem, I do not pretend to know. I do have one suggestion. A massive campaign should be commenced, in which people are encouraged to RECYCLE old waste, including mineral waste. Also, we need to reduce the amount of waste we create by changing our lifestyles. The First Nations in the area should be listened to. I was appalled when I read Taseko's ...

Attachment Comments on the project (From Patricia Chung to Panel Secretariat)

• Prosperity Gold-Copper Mine Project
• Author: Administration
• Reference number: 2293
• Submitted: 2010-04-30
• Comments on the project (From Patricia Chung to Panel Secretariat)
• Attachment included
• file:///C|/Documents%20and%20Settings/mckeagep/My%20Documents/Prosperity/Hearings/hearing%20registry/apr%2030/chung.htm Subject: FW: Prosperity Mine From: Trish Chung <email address removed> Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 6:45 AM To: Prosperity Review [CEAA] Subject: Prosperity Mine April 30, 2010 Colette Spagnuolo, Panel Manager Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency I would like to submit my letter of disapproval for the Fish Lake mine project. There is no loss in leaving the gold in the ground. Future generations and situations may be that the gold can be extracted without so much destruction for the benefit of the people living there. Investments made to date are speculative and government mandates and taxation laws promote such activities. Opposition to the project and all the time and money spent to carry this message forward comes from the heart not the pocket book. Future generations will be thankful for clean water, land and air not another desecrated mine site. The relatively short life span of the mine and the nature of the jobs are not good for family and community but create a camp culture that is unrealistic and can be unhealthy. These are not jobs I want for my family. We have come to a crossroads and we need to recognize it is not business as usual. Our climate is chaotic, forests are suffering, water is frighteningly low and drought is inevitable. These are the issues I care about. I expect my future and my children’s future to change but I am unwilling to continue to destroy the life giving natural world to prop up a failing economy. It will continue to fail until we reestablish a ...

Attachment Comments on the project (From Val Lucas to Panel Secretariat)

• Prosperity Gold-Copper Mine Project
• Author: Administration
• Reference number: 2298
• Submitted: 2010-04-30
• Comments on the project (From Val Lucas to Panel Secretariat)
• Attachment included
• file:///C|/Documents%20and%20Settings/mckeagep/My%20Documents/Prosperity/Hearings/hearing%20registry/apr%2030/v%20lucas.htm Subject: FW: *****SPAM***** Last day to voice "prosperity" concerns, please hear my voice From: Val Lucas <email address removed> Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 9:18 AM To: Prosperity Review [CEAA]; Minister [NCR] Subject: *****SPAM***** Last day to voice "prosperity" concerns, please hear my voice Good afternoon I am writing this morning to voice my concerns one last time before the review panel makes it's decision about Prosperity. I have read up on the mine, the company, and the FN perspective. I would like to officially state that I stand 100% behind the First Nations in their fight against the mine. The fact that the BC government rubber stamped the project astounds me, and I assure you, my future votes will reflect that. More specifically, from an environmental perspective, if this mine goes in and the surrounding watershed becomes toxic, an estimated 85,000 genetically distinct fish in Fish Lake and another 80,000 in "Little Fish" and other connected streams and wetlands will be destroyed. I know it sounds nieve to express concern about the fish when the project will employ people in the short term, but please look at it more as a sustainability issue. I have children, and my primary concern is keeping the earth sustainable. Many of our policies seem to be taking us in the wrong direction. We need to start maintaining our environment so that there still is one in the future. As a first Nations representative said on the radio, "what about the water, isn't that a valuable resource"? When I read the Taseko report, I noted that the company only dedicates one very ...

Attachment Questions and comments regarding the project (From Kelly Reuter, Taseko Lake Outfitters to Panel Secretariat)

• Prosperity Gold-Copper Mine Project
• Author: Administration
• Reference number: 2300
• Submitted: 2010-04-29
• Questions and comments regarding the project (From Kelly Reuter, Taseko Lake Outfitters to Panel Secretariat)
• Attachment included
• file:///C|/Documents%20and%20Settings/mckeagep/My%20Documents/Prosperity/Hearings/hearing%20registry/apr%2030/reuter%202.htm Subject: FW: *****SPAM***** Further Questions still unanswered From: sigfried Reuter <email address removed> Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 12:23 PM To: Prosperity Review [CEAA] Cc: Ken Vanderburgh; Rodger Stewart; Marilyn Baptiste Subject: *****SPAM***** Further Questions still unanswered Can Taseko truly say knowing of us here at the Taseko Lodge that their mine over us will maintain or improve the peoples well-being? Can Taseko thus claim the economy of the community & beyond will be better off as a result? Can Taseko ensure the integrity of the environment over the short term let alone over the long term when their main concern is to get out as much as they can from the ore body without going the extra mile or letting go of extra money to ensure local community traditional and non market activities are accounted for in ways that are acceptable to local peoples including the traditional use by First Nations and historic lodge & wilderness businesses? How will Taseko address the operational consequences of annihilating our health and business? What are their rules, incentives, programs & capacities to address their projects & operational consequences? These considerations come from Taseko’s own Prosperity EIS p139. I already see serious shortfalls and flaws as you can well imagine. Except for their pat answers in EIS and BC’s certification no where were we ever considered or mentioned by mining company or BC government. In fact from the recent responses to our questions Taseko continues to dismiss any responsibility or right action. Is ...

Attachment Comments on the project (From Patty Tawiyaka to Panel Secretariat)

• Prosperity Gold-Copper Mine Project
• Author: Administration
• Reference number: 2297
• Submitted: 2010-04-29
• Comments on the project (From Patty Tawiyaka to Panel Secretariat)
• Attachment included
• -----Original Message----- From: Patty Tawiyaka <email address removed> Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 2:12 PM To: Prosperity Review [CEAA] Subject: Support for Teztan Biny 4/29/10 Colette Spagnuolo, Panel Mgr. 160 Elgin St. Ottawa ON K1A 0H3 I believe and support the Chilcotin and Shuswap people who have presented at 3 hearings I attended in the Chilcotin and 1 in 100 Mile House. They know the Teztan Biny and have the wisdom beyond those professionals influenced by money and gold. The representatives for Prosperity have at least mislead the general public re; the size of the lake, the fishes health and that people don't use the land.The opposite is true with the evidence of pitt houses and burial grounds, plus the many Chilcotin people still camping and fishing there to carry on cultural traditions. The entire area relating to the watershed, the creeks and rivers will all be effected to some level adversely. ,Fracking (process used in exploration) has already released toxins into that environment. Bottom line the precautionary principle is the reason no mines should be allowed, too much risk to the watersheds and 1st Nations cultures (cultural genocide). This actually includes the other Gibraltar mines around the world. We must be protecting now not further desecrating our planet.The 1st Nations people that live in the Chilcotin are beginning to recover again from attacks on their culture and have chosen to stay close to their land, living simply. Between the deforestation and the potential threat of other mines in the Chicoltin Nation. There's too much at risk - do people promoting and supporting this mine, want to have this be their legacy to future generations of ...

Attachment Comments on the project (From Monique Boulanger to Review Panel)

• Prosperity Gold-Copper Mine Project
• Author: Administration
• Reference number: 2292
• Submitted: 2010-04-29
• Comments on the project (From Monique Boulanger to Review Panel)
• Attachment included
• -----Original Message----- From: Monique Boulanger <email address removed> Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 1:21 PM To: Prosperity Review [CEAA] Subject: *****SPAM***** Submission by Monique Boulanger 29 April 2010 Dear CEAA Panel Members: I sat through a few of the presentations this week and one point seems to be amiss. There is much mention of salmon and trout being an extremely valuable and irreplaceable food source for the Tsilhqot'in people and other First Nations in the Area. I would like to point out that wild Pacific Salmon is also a most valuable and irreplaceable food source for many Canadians as well. I know that for a fact since I live in Ontario and my family and friends eat wild Pacific Salmon on a weekly basis. Furthermore many other native and non native residents along the watershed all the way to the ocean rely on this important food source. To deprive all of these people of their nourishment in order for Taseko Mines Ltd. to increase its already blatant wealth is an abomination. I also wonder how a company such as Taseko Mines Limited can honestly seek entitlement to a land that obviously belongs to the Tsilhqot'in Nation and has for thousands of years. To me such a mentality belongs to an archaic mode of conquest and destruction that is counterproductive and not suppported by the majority of modern Canadians and other current societies. Its high time to update our regulations on these matters. Much permanent damage has already been done on this wondrous planet. Many of the delicate ecosystems remaining such as Teztan Biny in this country depend on us for their survival. We need to remember consistently that we also depend on this delicate ecosystem for ...

Attachment Questions and comments regarding the project (From Kelly Reuter, Taseko Lake Outfitters to Review Panel)

• Prosperity Gold-Copper Mine Project
• Author: Administration
• Reference number: 2299
• Submitted: 2010-04-29
• Questions and comments regarding the project (From Kelly Reuter, Taseko Lake Outfitters to Review Panel)
• Attachment included
• -----Original Message----- From: sigfried Reuter <email address removed> Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 8:56 AM To: Prosperity Review [CEAA] Subject: *****SPAM***** Campsites & More Access Dear Panel, I have a question for you. Who's mandate is social & economic accountability for this proposed mine? If it is not the miners as they have suggested and avoided and buried beneath all the paperwork,who is it? Taseko Mines seems to make suggestions for accountability to public loss of navigable water access and campsites in Transport Canada's presentation yet when it comes to addressing their impacts to our wilderness tourism business &lodge they have no idea what it takes to operate such a business. On top of this they are obviously overlooking the fact that our community based plan does not include opening up more roads and un-managed campsites ie forestry or UREPs. Open up some new roads, open up the whole area to more mining!!! These suggestions reek of overlap and Taseko is way out of bounds!! Total systematic, devaluing, annihilation of our wilderness business. Please I need an answer. Kelly Reuter Taseko Lake Outfitters PO Box 4232 Williams Lake BC, V2G2V3 Cell (250)305-6368 Lodge (604)484-5174 www.tasekolake.com

Attachment Comments on the project (From Andrea Battistel to Review Panel)

• Prosperity Gold-Copper Mine Project
• Author: Administration
• Reference number: 2277
• Submitted: 2010-04-28
• Comments on the project (From Andrea Battistel to Review Panel)
• Attachment included
• file:///C|/Documents%20and%20Settings/mckeagep/My%20Documents/Prosperity/Hearings/hearing%20registry/apr%2029/battistel.htm Subject: FW: *****SPAM***** Prosperity mine project From: andrea battistel <email address removed> Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 9:06 PM To: Prosperity Review [CEAA] Subject: *****SPAM***** Prosperity mine project RE: 09-05-44811 Prosperity Gold Copper Mine Panel Members, I am disappointed to see that this project has made it as far as a CEAA hearing. The science related to Taseko's so called 'compensation' plan is flawed in so many ways. The trout in the Fish lake sub basin are genetically distinct, if they are mostly killed off with a few left to be raised in a hatchery there is no way we should be pretending that we can maintain that genetic diversity. Genetics are influenced by the environment, and if you move the fish to another environment it will change them. If Fish lake, little fish lake, and the connected streams, drainages and wetlands are destroyed it will be the end of a unique fish. We can not predict the success or failure of trying to create a 'new' lake. When the existing one has to be destroyed first the risks are way too high. What if the new lake doesn't work out for the trout, what if there's not enough nutrients, too much pollution from tailings, or inadequate depth and oxygen? Digging up the terrestrial environment to build a new lake will displace terrestrial animals and plants, how will Taseko compensate for that loss? The proposed development will turn the watershed into a large industrial zone, draining into many important salmon streams, including the Fraser River. Taseko has not demonstrated an adequate fish compensation plan to ...

Attachment Comments on the project (From Candace Lucas to Panel Secretariat)

• Prosperity Gold-Copper Mine Project
• Author: Administration
• Reference number: 2275
• Submitted: 2010-04-28
• Comments on the project (From Candace Lucas to Panel Secretariat)
• Attachment included
• file:///C|/Documents%20and%20Settings/mckeagep/My%20Documents/Prosperity/Hearings/hearing%20registry/apr%2029/lucas.htm Subject: FW: Fish Lake From: CANDACE LUCAS <email address removed> Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 12:01 AM To: Info [CEAA] Cc: Minister [NCR]; Barry.Penner@gov.bc.ca; Blair.Lekstrom.MLA@leg.bc.ca Subject: Fish Lake Hello I am writing to let you know that I fully support the people (First Nations and otherwise) of the Teztan Bay region in their fight to save Fish Lake. (Prosperity Mine) Please re- assess your feasibility study very carefully. Are you sure this mine is the best thing for the region? Have you looked at it from all sides? The Natives deserve to be heard on this. A Concerned Citizen of Prince George file:///C|/Documents%20and%20Settings/mckeagep/My%20Docu...rosperity/Hearings/hearing%20registry/apr%2029/lucas.htm [4/29/2010 2:29:44 PM] Local Disk file:///C|/Documents%20and%20Settings/mckeagep/My%20Documents/Prosperity/Hearings/hearing%20registry/apr%2029/lucas.htm

Attachment Comments on the project (From Mary MacDonald to Panel Secretariat)

• Prosperity Gold-Copper Mine Project
• Author: Administration
• Reference number: 2242
• Submitted: 2010-04-27
• Comments on the project (From Mary MacDonald to Panel Secretariat)
• Attachment included
• file:///C|/Documents%20and%20Settings/mckeagep/My%20Documents/Prosperity/Hearings/hearing%20registry/apr%2027/macdonald.htm Subject: FW: *****SPAM***** comments on proposed Prosperity Mine From: mary macdonald <email address removed> Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2010 8:49 AM To: Prosperity Review [CEAA] Subject: *****SPAM***** comments on proposed Prosperity Mine I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Prosperity Gold/ Copper Mine. I am a resident of British Columbia, Canada, Earth. As a resident of north central British Columbia where a number of mines are currently being proposed by mining companies - and endorsed by the provincial government - I am very concerned that there is a fundamental lack of land use planning/ cumulative impacts when looking at the impact of these mines collectively. My concern in this regard relates to the cumulative impact on the various watersheds. In the case of the Prosperity Mine, I believe the mine poses potential threat to the Fraser river watershed. This risk in and of itself is intolerable due to the already precarious state of the river salmon & other fish species. Already a judicial inquiry is underway to look at the potential problems with the sockeye salmon stocks in the Fraser, and this inquiry has yet to make any determinations. To add another potential risk to this compromised watershed in this situation is wrong. I am concerned about the idea of converting a pristine fish-bearing lake into a tailing impoundment area; I believe this practice poses a danger to the future well being of Canadian watersheds and environment. This lake in particular is known to be fish bearing and in addition, is long held sacred by First Nations ...

Attachment Comments on the project (From Val Lucas to Panel Secretariat)

• Prosperity Gold-Copper Mine Project
• Author: Administration
• Reference number: 2280
• Submitted: 2010-04-27
• Comments on the project (From Val Lucas to Panel Secretariat)
• Attachment included
• file:///C|/Documents%20and%20Settings/mckeagep/My%20Documents/Prosperity/Hearings/hearing%20registry/apr%2029/v%20lucas.htm Subject: FW: I PROTEST THE PROSPERITY MINE PROJECT From: Val Lucas <email address removed> Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2010 11:55 PM To: Info [CEAA]; Minister [NCR]; barry.penner@gov.bc.ca; barry.penner.mla@leg.bc.ca; empr. minister@gov.bc.ca; blair.lekstrom.mla@leg.bc.ca Subject: I PROTEST THE PROSPERITY MINE PROJECT Dear Sir I am writing to let you know that I represent a group of concerned individuals in the William's Lake BC area who will NOT stand idly by while Taseko attempts to build the Prosperity Mine in our region. I suggest that both the Canadian and Provincial (BC) Governments change their policies. It is unacceptable to pollute lakes for mining. We need to focus more on recycling previously mined products. Water is a critical resource also, have you thought of that? Fish are also VERY important to our ecosystem, without them the entire food chain suffers. Most importantly, please, listen to the First Nations of Teztan Bay. They have told you time and time again that this is a sacred place to them. The recognize the audacity in putting a mine there. Why don't you? Sincerely Val Lucas William's Lake BC Live connected. Get Hotmail & Messenger for mobile. file:///C|/Documents%20and%20Settings/mckeagep/My%20Docu...erity/Hearings/hearing%20registry/apr%2029/v%20lucas.htm [4/29/2010 2:30:34 PM] http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9724459 Local Disk file:///C|/Documents%20and%20Settings/mckeagep/My%20Documents/Prosperity/Hearings/hearing%20registry/apr%2029/v%20lucas.htm

Attachment Comments on the project (From Jeff Zukiwsky to Panel Secretariat)

• Prosperity Gold-Copper Mine Project
• Author: Administration
• Reference number: 2257
• Submitted: 2010-04-27
• Comments on the project (From Jeff Zukiwsky to Panel Secretariat)
• Attachment included
• file:///C|/Documents%20and%20Settings/mckeagep/My%20Documents/Prosperity/Hearings/hearing%20registry/apr%2028/zukiwsky.htm Subject: FW: CEAR, Assessment 09-05-44811 From: Jeff Zukiwsky <email address removed> Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2010 1:55 PM To: Prosperity Review [CEAA] Subject: CEAR, Assessment 09-05-44811 I DO NOT support the development of the Prosperity Mine due to the significant negative environmental impacts it will have on Fish Lake and water resources in the area. Development of this project would also be a violation of Aboriginal Rights in Canada. Jeff Zukiwsky M.R.M <email address removed> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 5066 (20100427) __________ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com file:///C|/Documents%20and%20Settings/mckeagep/My%20Docu...perity/Hearings/hearing%20registry/apr%2028/zukiwsky.htm [4/28/2010 6:29:35 PM] http://www.eset.com/ Local Disk file:///C|/Documents%20and%20Settings/mckeagep/My%20Documents/Prosperity/Hearings/hearing%20registry/apr%2028/zukiwsky.htm

Attachment Questions and comments regarding the project (From Kelly Reuter, Taseko Lake Outfitters to Taseko Mines Limited)

• Prosperity Gold-Copper Mine Project
• Author: Administration
• Reference number: 2283
• Submitted: 2010-04-26
• Questions and comments regarding the project (From Kelly Reuter, Taseko Lake Outfitters to Taseko Mines Limited)
• Attachment included
• From: sigfried Reuter <email address removed> Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 7:37 AM To: Roderick Bell-Irving Cc: Prosperity Review [CEAA] Subject: *****SPAM***** Re: Questions from Taseko Lake Lodge Mr. Bell-Irving, Thank you for your assumptions. As far as you not being in the business that we are and being quite clueless as to what we need in order to operate a wilderness business (seeing as you are in the environmental demolition business) does not excuse your negatively impacting and overlapping our existing tenured hunting, guiding, grazing and disregarding high health standards. "A 1997 higher level document was signed off and has been used by Regional Managers for years however very little of the recommendations for planning was followed through- in most cases that documentation seemed to relax industry standards rather than put into place recommendations that were made... simply put CCLUP and Special Resource Management Plans were developed without FN input... "no meaningful consultation" or "capacity" to participate etc... in fact CCLUP was developed without any FN involvement and the 1997 (96?) document was developed behind closed doors with a few people who interpreted as they saw fit. Time and time again Government has done nothing to rectify the current land use planning issues in the area. In many areas of the region (Horsefly Special Management Zone) Special management zones continued to be treated "business as usual"... no consultation occurred to work with other industries{tourism-my clarification}... always industry{logging, mining obviously} has held the upper hand...", to quote a source that is in the know. ;) This is also how government and Taseko Mines has ...

Attachment Comments on the project (From Rosemary Garnet to Panel Secretariat)

• Prosperity Gold-Copper Mine Project
• Author: Administration
• Reference number: 2274
• Submitted: 2010-04-26
• Comments on the project (From Rosemary Garnet to Panel Secretariat)
• Attachment included
• -----Original Message----- From: Rosemary Garnet <email address removed> Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 7:33 AM To: Prosperity Review [CEAA] Subject: Fish Lake Dear Sirs, I feel very strongly that Fish Lake should be preserved and not turned into a mine. Thre is no proof that the ore they found is of high enough quality to warrant destroying such a beautiful wilderness area, where the natives have fished for generations and rely upon for food. Once destroyed, these areas will never recover. There are so few left on the planet now, and it is ridiculously short-sighted to destroy them simply to give in to the demands of a few greedy human beings wanting silver!! Now more than ever, the wisdom of native people is being respected and listened to. It is a crucial time for this planet, and if we don't wake up and stop the destruction now, there will be no more unspoiled places left. Sincerely, Rosemary Garnet <contact information removed>

Attachment Response to the Reuter family children regarding their questions and comments on the project (From Taseko Mines Limited to Justin, Jesse, Kelsey & Kara Reuter)

• Prosperity Gold-Copper Mine Project
• Author: Administration
• Reference number: 2282
• Submitted: 2010-04-26
• Response to the Reuter family children regarding their questions and comments on the project (From Taseko Mines Limited to Justin, Jesse, Kelsey & Kara Reuter)
• Attachment included
• Subject: FW: Questions from the Children from Taseko Lake Lodge concerning their health & future here From: Roderick Bell-Irving [mailto:RoderickBell-Irving@tasekomines.com] Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 7:21 AM To: sigfried Reuter Cc: Prosperity Review [CEAA] Subject: RE: Questions from the Children from Taseko Lake Lodge concerning their health & future here Justin, Jesse, Kelsey and Kara: I received your email with questions and will respond fully as quickly as possible. Thank you. Rod Roderick Bell-Irving, Manager, Environmental Project Development Taseko Mines Limited Suite 300 - 905 West Pender Street Vancouver, B.C. V6C 1L6 Phone: 778-373-4544 Toll Free: 1-800-667-2114 Cell: 604-818-3878 Fax: 778-373-4534 Mail: RoderickBell-Irving@tasekomines.com From: sigfried Reuter <email address removed> Sent: April 26, 2010 6:56 AM To: Roderick Bell-Irving mailto:RoderickBell-Irving@tasekomines.com Cc: Prosperity Review [CEAA] Subject: Questions from the Children from Taseko Lake Lodge concerning their health & future here Dear Taseko Miners, Air and water quality Considering the prevailing winds are north - south and with the nearness of our home to the open pit, dams & tailings pond, we are put in direct line of the mines fall out!! A baseline of air & water quality from our home here rather than using tables and charts from Greater Vancouver and Williams Lake along with more stringent monitoring of pollutants, dust, emissions, gasses off the mined ore, and ongoing water sampling would be far superior to ignoring the fact that we are living here and risk hazard and impacts to our family’s health. 1. What is our ...

Attachment Comments on the project (From Val Reimer to Panel Secretariat)

• Prosperity Gold-Copper Mine Project
• Author: Administration
• Reference number: 2279
• Submitted: 2010-04-26
• Comments on the project (From Val Reimer to Panel Secretariat)
• Attachment included
• file:///C|/Documents%20and%20Settings/mckeagep/My%20Documents/Prosperity/Hearings/hearing%20registry/apr%2029/reimer.htm Subject: FW: 09-05-44811 From: Val Reimer <email address removed> Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 7:19 PM To: Prosperity Review [CEAA] Subject: 09-05-44811 RE: Taseko Mines Limited high volume open pit gold-copper mine located 125 km SW of Williams Lake in South Central British Columbia Dear Sirs/Madams, I am appalled to learn that the BC government has completed an assessment and approved this mine near Williams Lake. I urgently request the the Federal Government does not make the same mistake. As you know, such mines are environmentally destructive and extremely detrimental to the surrounding wildlife. Furthermore, the First Nations of the region consider the entire area to be very sacred, and strongly oppose the idea. Rightly so. I suggest that instead of creating more environmental damage, you begin a massive recycling campaign to recycle the copper and gold that has already been mined, or better yet, find alternatives to these materials. In this day and age, surely that is possible. Fish lake is a beloved lake, and to see it become a tailings pond because of an unsustainable lifestyle and ever increasing financial greed, would break the hearts of many, many people. If you don't believe me, please look at this website: http://www.protectfishlake.ca/ I think I can speak for many of us when I say that I would gladly adjust my lifestyle to improve the environment. We simply can't continue with the destruction of our earth. I am writing to inform you that the residents of this region, and many citizens of other areas, OPPOSE THE MINE, and will not let it go ...

Attachment Questions and comments regarding the project (From Justin, Jesse, Kelsey & Kara Reuter to Taseko Mines Limited)

• Prosperity Gold-Copper Mine Project
• Author: Administration
• Reference number: 2281
• Submitted: 2010-04-26
• Questions and comments regarding the project (From Justin, Jesse, Kelsey & Kara Reuter to Taseko Mines Limited)
• Attachment included
• From: sigfried Reuter <email address removed> Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 6:56 AM To: Roderick Bell-Irving Cc: Prosperity Review [CEAA] Subject: Questions from the Children from Taseko Lake Lodge concerning their health & future here Dear Taseko Miners, Air and water quality Considering the prevailing winds are north - south and with the nearness of our home to the open pit, dams & tailings pond, we are put in direct line of the mines fall out!! A baseline of air & water quality from our home here rather than using tables and charts from Greater Vancouver and Williams Lake along with more stringent monitoring of pollutants, dust, emissions, gasses off the mined ore, and ongoing water sampling would be far superior to ignoring the fact that we are living here and risk hazard and impacts to our family’s health. 1. What is our surety of continued pristine air and water quality here? 2. How are you going to be accountable to us here in the neighborhood to address these concerns? Water levels and potential flooding Seeing as how Taseko Mines has neglected to consider our family’s well being and safety so far and no one has ever been around at Spring melt off or seen the high water level... and in your EIS you expect the water levels to increase through your 'lake' and then down the Beece Creek.... 3. Will you be reinforcing the south bank above the lodge yard and ensuring our family's safety and the continued safety of our home & buildings? Sincerely, Justin, Jesse, Kelsey & Kara Reuter with help from Mom Taseko Lake Outfitters PO Box 4232 Williams Lake BC, V2G2V3 Cell (250)305-6368 Lodge (604)484-5174 www.tasekolake.com ...

Attachment Comments on the project (From Eldon Pierce to Panel Secretariat)

• Prosperity Gold-Copper Mine Project
• Author: Administration
• Reference number: 2276
• Submitted: 2010-04-24
• Comments on the project (From Eldon Pierce to Panel Secretariat)
• Attachment included
• -----Original Message----- From:<email address removed> Sent: Saturday, April 24, 2010 4:24 AM To: Blair.Lekstrom.MLA@leg.bc.ca Subject: proposed tailings pond in Fish Lake, BC I am writing in protest of the BC government's recent approval of Taseko Mines Prosperity Project at Fish Lake and Little Fish Lake. My message is simple: 1) that you work to include the voice of the local inhabitants in your assessment of this project 2) that you consider the shift in paradigm that is occurring in Canada right now, wherein our natural resources and ecosystems are no longer considered simply tools for economic development, but also as entities that defy our understanding and deserve protection Thank you for your time, Eldon Pierce Vancouver, BC

Attachment Response to CEAR doc # 2212: DFO's April 22, 2010 follow-up questions (From Taseko Mines Limited to Fisheries and Oceans Canada)

• Prosperity Gold-Copper Mine Project
• Author: Administration
• Reference number: 2213
• Submitted: 2010-04-23
• Response to CEAR doc # 2212: DFO's April 22, 2010 follow-up questions (From Taseko Mines Limited to Fisheries and Oceans Canada)
• Attachment included
• Questions regarding April 13th Submission. Subject: FW: *****SPAM***** RE: Questions regarding April 13th Submission. From: Gregory Smyth [mailto:gsmyth@knightpiesold.com] Sent: Friday, April 23, 2010 10:46 AM To: Summers, John; Silverstein, Adam; Roderick Bell-Irving Cc: Prosperity Review [CEAA] Subject: *****SPAM***** RE: Questions regarding April 13th Submission. John I've reviewed the numbers and provide the following clarification: ● 8040 m2 of instream habitat ● 8900 m2 of deep-pool habitat ● 1500 m2 of spawning habitat ● Total habitat (sum of three types above) = 18,440 m2 The sum total of 16,400 m2 found at the bottom of page 29 of 50 is an error. Apologies for the confusion. Your assumption about the existing riparian forest outside of the 2 metre strip being kept largely intact is correct. The spoil will be removed and used elsewhere for the project. Kind Regards, ....................................................... Greg Smyth Senior Project Manager Knight Piésold Ltd. ....................................................... Suite 1400 - 750 West Pender Vancouver | British Columbia | Canada | V6C 2T8 phone: +1 604 685 0543 | fax: +1 604 685 0147 direct: +1 604 685 0543 ext 319 email: gsmyth@knightpiesold.com web: http://www.knightpiesold.com P Please consider the environment before printing this email. þ This communication, including any attachments, is intended only for the use of the intended recipient(s) and is confidential. If the reader of this communication is not the intended recipient, any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. Knight Piésold does not warrant the accuracy of ...

Attachment Environment Canada's response to Taseko's CEAR doc # 2112 regarding Migratory Birds (From Environment Canada to Taseko Mines Limited)

• Prosperity Gold-Copper Mine Project
• Author: Administration
• Reference number: 2214
• Submitted: 2010-04-22
• Environment Canada's response to Taseko's CEAR doc # 2112 regarding Migratory Birds (From Environment Canada to Taseko Mines Limited)
• Attachment included
• Subject: FW: CWS and Taseko Draft Meeting Minutes - Feb 18 2010 Attachments: Prosperity - EC Migratory Birds Response April 22 2010 .pdf; IBP_Estimate_Letter_24Mar2010_Stantec _2_.pdf ______________________________________________ From: Wong,Phil [PYR] Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2010 6:44 PM To: 'Roderick Bell-Irving' Cc: Robinson,Andrew [PYR]; Breault,Andre [PYR]; Millikin,Rhonda [PYR]; Boyd,Sean [PYR]; DeShield,Coral [PYR]; Schneider,Saul [PYR]; Jeffrey,Barry [PYR]; McLean,Robyn [CEAA]; Knowles,Lauren: NRCAN; Preston, Michael; Spagnuolo,Colette [CEAA] Subject: RE: CWS and Taseko Draft Meeting Minutes - Feb 18 2010 Hi Rod: Please find attached Environment Canada's review comments on, and response to, the Stantec memo attached in your note below. Phil ________________________________ From: Roderick Bell-Irving [mailto:RoderickBell-Irving@tasekomines.com] Sent: Sunday, March 28, 2010 5:18 PM To: Wong,Phil [PYR]; McLean,Robyn [CEAA] Cc: Robinson,Andrew [PYR]; Breault,Andre [PYR]; Millikin,Rhonda [PYR]; Boyd,Sean [PYR]; DeShield,Coral [PYR]; Schneider,Saul [PYR]; Jeffrey,Barry [PYR]; Knowles,Lauren: NRCAN; Preston, Michael Subject: RE: CWS and Taseko Draft Meeting Minutes - Feb 18 2010 Phil: In this first “day-off” since beginning the Panel hearings I am trying to catch up on matters. By copy of this email I am asking Stantec to review and comment on your written responses to their February 1st comments on Andre’s paper. Once we have their comments I will forward them on to you and the others. In the meantime please find attached another memo from Stantec discussing their further analysis of Andre’s data. Perhaps CWS could look at this and answer the questions ...