City council voted Monday to take a closer look at taking a case-by-case approach to authorizing future exploration activity and mine development within city limits, using the Official Community Plan (OCP) and Zoning Bylaw process.

“I’m looking for a balanced solution to a complex matter, and I think administration has provided us with something that is quite workable and fair to all the stakeholders,” said Mayor Laura Cabott.

Per the bylaw process, a public hearing will be held March 11, with a decision possible by early June.

The decision was prompted by an earlier request by the McLean Lake Residents Association, which asked the city to prohibit mining and mineral exploration within city limits.

They said a ban would protect groundwater resources and minimize disturbances to residential and recreational areas. Currently, mining activities are permitted in limited areas of the city.

Council decided to further pursue the approach developed by city staff for mineral exploration and mineral development, so that the city would:

• Not ban mining activities but better regulate them;

• Provide opportunity for public involvement in these decisions; and

• Designate council as the final decision-making body.

Current claims would be grandfathered under this proposal, such as the Class 1 work now underway by Gladiator Metals.

Serious concerns raised

Cabott recognized the “serious, legitimate concerns” raised to date by some residents about how mining activity has affected water quality, radon exposure, use and enjoyment, and recreational activities.

“It seems to me this alternative is the right way to go; it’s balanced, we’re not shirking our responsibilities and handing them over to someone else,” Cabott said.

At Monday’s meeting, Squatter’s Road resident Skeeter Wright said the city’s proposal has “multiple shortcomings” and could leave the city open to legal problems as a result of “decision-maker liabilities” by having the city, instead of the territory, decide on mining permits.

“First Nations and the Yukon government are working on new legislation to replace the Quartz Mining Act and Placer Mining Acts,” said Wright.

“Decision-maker liabilities and compensation have been noted in this process.”

Wright noted that Gladiator Metals says it has already invested millions of dollars carrying out work allowed under its Class 1 Authorization.

Should the city decide not to authorize more work, “any claim for compensation would have a significant effect on the city budget.”

Mining is our identity

Coun. Kirk Cameron said Whitehorse has “a history that connects with mining, that connects with an incredibly rich ore body that is not different from many other areas of the Yukon.

“It’s part of who we are, our identity.”

He said he was worried by the prospect of taking mining away as an economic opportunity for the city.

Instead of a ban, he feels the city has a role to “help prevent undue hardship or impacts on people, the environment or the economy.”

Coun. Ted Laking noted the lack of input from First Nations whose traditional territories would be affected by a change to the current regime.

“Will (a zoning change) put us offside with the relationship we’re trying to grow with the other orders of government?” he asked.

Engagement to come

City manager Jeff O’Farrell said work hasn’t started yet on what the OCP and Zoning Bylaw amendments would look like, pending direction from council, so it was too early to say how partners and First Nations would be engaged.

“We know that at least one First Nation has reached out to ask for a discussion about this,” said Development Services director Mike Gau.

He said there would be more notification of the Yukon and First Nations governments, including letters to appropriate landowners.

“By council giving first reading to one of the options put forward, we now have clear direction,” he said.

Cabott said right now the city is “wide open” for permitted mining activities in certain zoned areas, and that “there is nothing the city can do.”

She said she doesn’t support a full ban, especially because of the problems it would cause with existing claim holders.

“It’s not a full prohibition, but if you want to mine you need to apply for a conditional use.”

She noted that the claims that are still viable really exist in places that have already had a lot of mining activity in the past, e.g. gravel pits, e.g. dug-up areas.