Before a packed house in city council chambers last Monday, council members were told over and over again that they should ban mineral exploration and development within city limits, either temporarily or forever.

The public hearing was on whether the Zoning Bylaw should be amended to give the city a role in determining if and how mining activities take place, on a case-by-case basis.

The existing 72 claims within city limits would be grandfathered under this proposal.

Ironically, the proposed amendment arose from a Feb. 5 request by the McLean Lake Residents Association to permanently ban mining activities within city limits.

This, in turn, was prompted in part by exploration activity last year by Gladiator Metals near Cowley Creek. That resulted in a $43,700 fine under the Quartz Mining Act for six violations.

A report summarizing public input received is slated for review by council April 2.

Mayor Laura Cabott noted that six written submissions had also been received, with four opposed and two “with concerns.”

Of the 15 presenters at last Monday’s hearing, only three people spoke in favour of the amendment.

“The antiquated, outdated Quartz Mining Act does not reflect 21st-century values, and who knows when the new (territorial) legislation will be ready?” said Glenys Baltimore.

She said it should be up to a community to determine what happens on its lands – not corporate interests.

Geologist Danielle Ayotte said the city requested a mineral assessment in 1997, with the council of the day using the data to avoid high mineral areas for residential use.

“I hope you can find the resources and energy to go and investigate all those concerns, to see if they can be mitigated or not,” Ayotte said.

But for now, “going to the mining stage has a lot of checks and balances in place.”

Pause until new mining 
laws in place

The four presenters calling for a pause on allowing new mining activity had different reasons.

The Whitehorse Cross Country Ski Club, represented by Jean-Paul Molgat, wants the city to permanently protect its trail network, whether it’s from mining or housing development.

Some 75 per cent of the trail network was staked in 2008, before a staking moratorium was put in place, and now some are being actively explored.

Spence Hill first lived in Whitehorse in the 1970s, when the city “really was a mining town. I strongly oppose going back to that identity,” she said.

“Council should wait until new mining legislation is in place, with protection of water at the core,” and in the meantime, start collecting more baseline data on water quality,” Hill said.

Baseline data on water quality also prompted Tory Russell’s presentation.

She noted the risks posed by radon, arsenic and molybdenum to wells and aquifers in the region from drilling.

“My request of the city is to pause, in a precautionary way, all mining activities until such time as there is capacity … to protect water quality and quantity in the public interest.”

Radon gas prompted Angela Sabo’s call for a pause on mining activity.

She presented current research from the University of Calgary on how far radon gas travels through drill holes – up to one mile away.

“I’m concerned about increasing radon gas in our neighbourhoods without further research,” she said, noting that Yukon University will be collecting baseline data this summer.

“Is the health of our citizens important, or is it the benefits we may get from exploration programs?” Sabo asked.

No mining best for people, environment here

Among the reasons given for not allowing any mineral exploration or mining development in city limits by eight presenters were:

• The city’s legal liability – and cost to taxpayers – of turning down a mining project;

• Preserving wildlife, water sources, trail systems and quality of life;

• Avoiding dust and noise in residential areas;

• Adversely affecting much-needed housing development plans; and

• The current system’s inability to take cumulative impacts into account.

“Removing one small, small portion of the Yukon that is within city limits won’t impact the industry in the grand scheme of things, and will greatly enhance Whitehorse as a tourist destination,” said Lewis Rifkind, on behalf of the Yukon Conservation Society.

“YCS is not opposed to mining, as long as it is done in appropriate areas, uses best environmental practices, and has comprehensive and adequately funded closure plans,” he said.

Within city limits and residential areas outside of city limits are not “appropriate areas,” however, he added.

The Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society, represented by Randi Newton, said it isn’t clear if the city will have the legal ability to say no to projects without having to pay compensation.

“A comprehensive legal analysis to confirm (this) would satisfy us at this point,” she said.

“But prohibiting mining within city limits would allow the city to opt out of the demonstrated risks fully-licensed projects are prone to,” she added, noting the current water problems at Mt. Nansen, Minto, Victoria Gold, and Alexco.

Don Roberts of Yukoners Concerned said the city shouldn’t allow mining within city limits.

As well, the Yukon government should pause its approvals until all the regional land use plans are in place, he added.

Problems he cited include water supply quality, dust and noise near residential areas, damage to the recreational trail system, more radon pathways and lower property values.

Climate change impacts also need to be taken into account, Roberts told council.

The other presenters calling for a permanent ban were Skeeter Wright, Genesee Keevil, Imogen Keevil, Lois Johnston and Rick Griffiths.

City staff have prepared a chart showing how the proposed case-by-case approval process would work compared with the status quo.

Go to Whitehorse.ca and search for “Draft Mineral Exploration Process (Proposed Bylaw 2024-23)”.

The city earlier notified the Kwanlin Dün First Nation, Ta’an Kwäch’än Council, the Yukon Chamber of Mines, and the Yukon and Whitehorse Chambers of Commerce of the proposed amendment.