Brian Churchill’s comments to the press at the announcement of Site C.

While it is true that there are already dams on the Peace River, they are on the edge of the Rocky Mountains and anchored in solid material. The proposed Site C is 80 kilometres out on the prairies in lacustrine (lake sediment) material highly susceptible to sloughing and sliding. The actual footprint of the proposed reservoir could be 2 to 3 times the reservoir area do to the massive amount of erosion in these unstable soils.

While the government has maintained that BCHydro has been a net importer of electricity the past few years this is subject to scepticism as while they have purchased cheap coal fired electricity at night from Alberta they have held over water in the reservoirs that could have generated electricity. The 1980’s proposal for Site C said that there would be brown outs in BC’s lower mainland with in 10 years, we were able to show that this simply wasn’t true and in the last 30 years without Site C or any other significant generation being built there have been no shortages. We look forward to once again examining the true about electricity use.

Site C is not about meeting the electricity demands of British Columbian’s it is about exporting electricity. Former energy minister, now Senator, Richard Neufeld recently addressed Fort St. John City Council telling them to get on the Site C train. He also pointed out that the provincial government’s throne speech commits to connecting Fort Nelson and the Horn River Natural Gas Development to the provincial grid. Neufeld stated that Horn River would use up to 500 megawatts of the potential 900 Site C is designed for.

The proposed Site C project would actually produce greenhouse gases. By BCHydro’s own account as documented in our report BC’s Peace River Valley and Climate Change (found at www.itsourvalley.ca ) Site C would emit green house gases (74000 tons CO2 per year, equivalent of 18,500 cars) and continue to emit over the life of the reservoir. The reservoir would also result in the loss of the existing forest to absorb CO2 leaving an total CO2/year equivalent of 147000 tons equal to adding 36,000 vehicles a year in the lower mainland.

I was asked why I was so passionate about Site C. I said because it was wrong to flood some of the most productive land available to export power. The Peace River region is known as a special climate area in Canada, the most northern agricultural area. There is enough agricultural capability in the Peace River Valley to provide vegetables to all of northern Canada. In my family history we left southern Saskatchewan in the Dirty Thirties, moving to northern Saskatchewan where we could actually grow enough food to eat. The Peace River Valley can support our food needs and as climate change causes warmer temperatures and water shortages in places like California our ability to grow food here will be priceless. We cannot destroy this ability. Similarly, ecologically the Peace River Valley has a priceless role to play in ecologic resiliency to climate change. This is detailed in our report.

We are confident that in a full panel review under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act we will be able to show that the Site C proposal is not in the public interest of Canadians and British Columbians.

The Premier’s Hidden Agenda: Site C

The decision to move to stage 3 of Site C indicates that the BC Liberals are willing to sacrifice

twenty percent of BC’s top agricultural land, the livelihood of farmers and the rights of First

Nations people simply to gain export power and power for fossil fuel extraction.Site C moving to

stage three is just an announcement to move into the regulatory stage - not for construction of the

dam. We are relieved that we will be entering a formal environmental assessment process: the

consultation process to date has been totally unsatisfactory. The process so far has shown a

heavy pro-construction bias and the question has yet to be asked whether or not we want or need

this dam. This megaproject and the people of BC deserve a full federal review panel. This means

impartial experts to review and assess the huge impacts and public hearings that allow for the

concerns of BC citizens to be heard. We are confident that it will not pass the assessments and

that, in the long term, it is not in the best interest of British Columbians.

The Peace River is one of North America's key rivers, about 1,500 kms long and the only river

to carve through the Rockies.,. Already impacted by two major dams further upstream, the

remaining warm and rich valley bottom has become even more important for wildlife and

agriculture. Site C would flood lengths of river valleys equivalent to the stretch from Richmond

to Chilliwack or Langley to Hope. The Peace River valley has some of the best agricultural land

in BC and it would result in the flooding of over 7,000 acres of class 1 and 2 soils. This is the

biggest threat to the Agricultural Land Reserve and agriculture in general from a single project in

BC. In light of climate change, BC food security is critical and irreplaceable. The banks of the

Peace Valley near the Site C dam are highly susceptible to sloughing and sliding, making the

actual footprint of the proposed reservoir much larger due to the massive amounts of erosion that

is expected to occur. It is wrong to flood such vast quantities of prime agricultural land to export

power.

First the government said we needed the power for domestic use, then they admitted in the

February 2010 throne speech that it is for export. The BC agricultural plan says “All British

Columbians should have access to safe, locally produced food” and includes as a strategy

“Preservation of agricultural land for future generations of farm and ranch families”. Yet they

proceed with plans to flood thousands of acres of prime agricultural land. The energy plan states

“All new electricity generation projects will have zero net greenhouse gas emissions”, yet they

give the go ahead for a megaproject that will produce the equivalent of 36,000 new vehicles on

BC roads/year. Can we believe what they say?

Why is this shrouded in such mystery? Why are the Premier and the Minister of Energy, Mines,

and Petroleum Resources so afraid to meet the public with this decision, meeting 20 km from the

nearest town? It seems this process has been kept hidden behind closed doors, lacking any kind

of transparency.

THE FACTS

A Site C large-scale hydroelectric dam

• Is NOT green energy due to the significant environmental impacts

• Wipes out 104km of homes, traditional territory and habitat of local residents

and wildlife;

• Is expensive (est. $6.6 to $10 billion) and must be fully researched and

compared to other options.

The loss of the massive Peace Valley’s critical ecosystem

• Contributes net emissions of 146,730 tonnes of CO2 eq/year to climate change,

equivalent to the addition of 36,000 vehicles to the Lower Mainland;

• Threatens bull trout (a listed species) and migratory birds; and

• Damages valuable wildlife habitat and connectivity in the north-south Rocky

Mountain corridor and in the east-west Peace River corridor.

The loss of valuable Peace Valley agricultural land

• Decreases BC’s own food supply and self-sustainability; and

• Displaces farmers from their multi-generational homes and livelihood.

Flooding First Nations’ traditional territory

• Buries valuable archaeological and traditional use areas; and

• Permanently alters territory, wildlife, systems and use.