This letter is in response to the article that appeared in your Feb. 23, edition under the headline,  Ministry Rejects Arsenic Increase Claim,  written by, Kristen Douglas.   The article describes a recent letter reportedly sent to our city council by newly appointed Provincial Minister of Environment, Murray Coell. The lead sentence for the article states, “Quinsam Coal mine operations have not increased arsenic levels in nearby Long Lake says the Ministry of Environment.” However, in the fourth column of the article Douglas quotes Minister Coell as stating, “The ministry acknowledges that data indicate Long Lake sediment arsenic levels have increased from those that existed prior to the mine.” This quote seems very inconsistent with both the article’s headline and the author’s lead sentence. If it is accurate it may represent a positive shift on the part of the provincial government. I have not seen Minister Coell’s  letter and so I am somewhat reticent to comment on statements attributed to him.  If however, Minister Coell has indicated that arsenic concentrations in the water of Long Lake comply with  B C Guidelines, and there is no obvious problem with fish health, I would say that he is correct on both counts.   However, it would be very inappropriate of him to try and reframe the issue as one of present  arsenic concentrations in the water or present fish health within the lake. The problem is with the sediment in the bottom of the lake and what it will mean for our river system in the future.Readers should be aware that in an attempt to protect our environment, the B C government has set up contamination guidelines for many specific aspects of it.  We have BC Water Guidelines for Fresh Water Aquatic Life, BC Water Guidelines for Drinking Water, BC Sediment Guidelines for Fresh Water Aquatic life, etc.  These contamination guidelines have been carefully worked out using the best available research.  They all serve an indispensable purpose.  It is extremely inappropriate to try and abort these guidelines by playing a game of revolving chairs as some have done in the past.  When there is a problem with toxic substances in the sediment  exceeding the B.C. sediment guidelines, change the subject to water quality. When there is a problem with sulphate concentrations exceeding the guidelines for fresh water aquatic life, change the subject to drinking water.  The difficulty we are facing is that sediment samples from Long Lake contain arsenic concentrations that exceed the British Columbia Sediment Guidelines for Fresh Water Aquatic Life by as much as 30 times in places close to the mine.  Sediment in water bodies is extremely important as it forms the basis for the food web.  Some problems first demonstrate themselves in the sediment and then move to the water column.  The Ministry of Environment is aware of these factors.  That is why they have established specific guidelines for sediment.  The arsenic problem that devastated the drinking water in Bangladesh in the 1990s started in the sediment. That is one of the reasons the three scientists from the Canadian Water Network are involved.  Their expectation is that the arsenic in the sediment of Long Lake will eventually enter the water column as the lake ages.  When it does, the effects in Long Lake and all areas downstream will be most unpleasant.  The Canadian Water Network scientists haven’t put a time line on this as their investigative efforts are continuing. They have made it very clear to all parties involved that adding to the arsenic deposit is not prudent. They believe that the proposed mine expansion as it stood in April of 2 010, would do exactly that.I am not surprised that the Canadian Water Network scientists are of the opinion that the majority of arsenic in Long Lake sediment is the result of mining operations by Quinsam Coal. If Environment Minister Coell has doubts about this I would refer him to his own ministry’s 2006 document, “An Evaluation of Sediment Quality and Invertebrate Benthic Communities of Long and Middle Quinsam Lakes With Regard to Local Coal Mining Activity,” authored by Dr. Rick Nordin of the University of Victoria, and a 2008 study by Quinsam Coal’s consulting firm Golder Associates titled, “Preliminary Sediment Quality Assessment for Long Lake Quinsam Mine.” While these two earlier documents are not as definitive as the more recent  Canadian Water Network reports they both point toward the mine as the source of the contamination.If Mr. Coell cannot see how the sulfur content of the coal in the new seam to be mined with Quinsam Coal’s expansion (7 South #4 coal seam) is higher than that presently being mined ( 5 South) others, including the company, can.  I refer him to page one, topic one of the Nov. 4, 2009 Quinsam Coal Environmental Technical Review Committee Public Meeting Minutes where the company described its proposal. The sulfur content of the coal is of environmental concern because sulphates come from the sulfur in the coal.  According to the Canadian Water Network the sulphates are leading to the arsenic concentrations in the sediment of Long Lake. Stanley GoodrichCampbell River

Campbell River Mirror