Impacts of Mining in the Yukon
YCS' perspective on the environmental, economic and social costs of Yukon's mining industry.
The way we mine in the Yukon is not sustainable. The Umbrella Final Agreement defines sustainable development as “meeting the needs and aspirations of the present without compromising the ability to meet those of the future.” The Yukon’s mining regime fails to meet this standard. Bankrupt, abandoned mines and a legacy of environmental contamination plague mining in the Yukon. The Yukon is giving away its environmental heritage to the mining industry and receiving societal upheaval and staggering bills in return.
Faro Mine captured from the sky. Photo Credit: Peter Mather
Environmental Impacts
The Yukon is renowned for its functioning ecosystems, rich biodiversity, and beautiful landscapes, which support healthy caribou populations. However, resource road development is fragmenting their habitat. Linear disturbances, such as roads and cutlines, fracture their habitat, affect migration corridors, and increase predator access (Environment Canada, 2012).
Our 2024 report shows that road density has approached 0.3 km/km2 in some areas of the Clear Creek and Klaza caribou herds’ ranges (Pothier Guerra & Jones, 2024). Research indicates that barren-ground caribou density drops by 63% when linear disturbances exceed 0.3 km/km2 (Nellemann & Cameron, 1998). Habitat fragmentation from mining is approaching biologically critical levels, threatening the survival of caribou herds. We also found that 41% of the Clear Creek and Klaza caribou herds’ ranges are affected by industrial activities like mining (Pothier Guerra & Jones, 2024). Caribou are displaced as they tend to actively avoid areas with high human activity, like roads, and mining operations, due to noise, reduced food availability, and perceived danger (Nellemann & Cameron, 1998; Reimers & Colman, 2006).
The effect of the Yukon’s obsession with mining extends beyond caribou to salmonid-bearing watersheds. In reference to the 2022 paper by Sergeant et al., mining for metals disrupts geologic materials, often causing pollution in groundwater and downstream surface waters that can vary from chronic low-level metal leaching to severe, watershed-scale contamination. This contamination from mining can be detected hundreds of kilometres from its source and persist for decades even after mine closure, severely disrupting salmonid migration, antipredator behaviour, sense-of-smell, seawater adaptability, spawning, invertebrate food resources, and ultimately their survival. Furthermore, mines also effect salmonid-bearing watersheds through mechanisms like stream channel burial, and changes to flow regimes. Not to mention the numerous communities whose residents also rely on these watersheds for drinking water, recreation and sustenance.
Economic Impacts
The economic effects of mining in the Yukon extend way beyond any short term benefits. Our chronic failure to conduct comprehensive economic impact analyses that cover all stages of a mine's life cycle (including remediation, closure, and post-closure) results in long-term costs to the public purse. This means less money for other things such as health care and housing.
The Faro Mine, once touted as a major economic contributor, provides a classic example of the long-term economic burdens of mines. Once one of the largest open-pit lead/zinc mines in the world, Faro now ranks as one of Canada’s top five most contaminated sites, with 70 million tonnes of tailings and 320 million tonnes of waste rocks left to the Canadian government to remediate (Government of Canada, 2024). According to the Faro Mine Retrospective Initiative, its closure has cost $2.4 billion for remediation to date, with an additional $1.2 billion projected over the next 25 years (Hodge et al., 2024). All mines inevitably run out of ore; we simply must account for more than short term economic gains. The long term environmental and social costs that closure inevitably brings underscore the danger of only focusing on short term economic gain.
Figure 1. Historic and projected government (taxpayer) expenditures on the Faro Mine.
All numbers are expressed in $2020. Historic numbers are documented. The costs of “closure” are taken from the current application by the Federal Government for a water licence. The projections of post-closure costs are based on two time horizons – 500 and 1000 years and two discount rates: 0% and 3%. Source: Hodge et al., in preparation.
Victoria Gold’s Eagle Mine heap leach disaster begs the question, is hard rock mining in the Yukon economically viable?
The incident has caused significant environmental damage and created the need for ongoing, emergency remediation efforts. According to mine licensing expert Cord Hamilton, emergency remediation efforts and long term cleanup will cost at least $100 million, on top of regular site closure and remediation. Victoria Gold has never remitted any royalties. Upon abandoning Minto Mine, Minto Metals Corporation left the Selkirk First Nation with over $1.37 million in unpaid royalties (Hodge et al., 2024).
Yukoners shoulder the closure costs of mines:
Directly through Government subsidized remediation costs and;
Indirectly through increased social service demands due to job losses, community disruptions, and potential future liabilities.
It is imperative that we hold mining companies accountable for all costs, otherwise - we taxpayers will pick up their tab.
Social Impacts
Mining affects every Yukoner. The direct effects of mining are disproportionate for certain communities including racialized women, Indigenous Peoples, and 2SLGBTQQIA (Two-spirit, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, questioning, intersex and asexual) identifying persons. The National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls (2019) determined that resource extraction can drive economic insecurity and exacerbate violence and racial discrimination towards Indigenous women and girls.
In 2000, YCS and the Yukon Status of Women Council released the publication “Gaining Ground: Women, Mining and the Environment,” outlining that “mostly, women work in administrative positions or in camps as cooks and support staff.” Although more opportunities have opened for women to participate in other areas such as geology, engineering, biology, and trades, this study states that there remained a significant absence of women in the middle and senior management of the mining industry.
The Liard Aboriginal Women’s Society 2020 study, “Never Until Now,” revealed the harmful impact of mining on marginalized communities has not improved over the last two decades. The study found that 55% of respondents worked as cooks, cook’s helpers or in cleaning jobs (CCSG Associates et al., 2021). These positions are typically the least paying roles at camps and involve some of the hardest work, with the majority of respondents reporting working unpaid overtime hours (CCSG Associates et al., 2021). Additionally, 63% of respondents experienced discrimination by gender or sexual orientation, and 45% experienced discrimination by race or Indigeneity (CCSG Associates et al., 2021). Not everyone benefits from mining and marginalized communities suffer the most.
Conclusion
Ultimately, it is the Yukon Government’s responsibility to create laws and policies that address the environmental, economic, and social impacts of mining. It is our responsibility to demand this from our government. We must demand legislation that recognizes and responds to biologically significant, critical levels of habitat disturbance and water contamination to protect our environment and citizens. We must demand appropriate enforcement of legislation that eliminates preventable environmental catastrophes. We must demand legislation that ensures that when mines are developed and eventually closed, the public does not end up financially burdened. We must demand legislation that empowers and protects our vulnerable communities from violence and discrimination related to race, gender, or sexuality. We must demand these changes because the status quo is failing the Yukon and Yukoners.
Please Note: This blog post is adapted from an article we wrote for the Yukon Star's Discovery Days edition.
References
CCSG Associates, Liard Aboriginal Women's Society, & Yukon status of women Council. (2021). Never Until Now: Indigenous and Racialized Women's Experiences Working in Yukon and Northern British Columbia Mine Camps.
Environment Canada. (2012). Recovery strategy for the Woodland Caribou (rangifer tarandus caribou), Boreal Population, In Canada.
Government of Canada. (2024, April 26). Faro Mine Remediation Project: Yukon. Relations Couronne-Autochtones et Affaires du Nord Canada / Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada. Retrieved August 14, 2024, from https://www.rcaanc-cirnac.gc.ca/eng/1480019546952/1537554989037
Guerra, L. P., & Jones, S. (2024). Industrial Disturbances in the Ranges of Two Yukon Caribou Herds Approach Critical Levels.
Hodge, T., Anthony, R., Kunz, N., Hay, S., Carlin, I., Batdorj, B., & Hameliy, C. (2024). Through the Prism of Time: The Faro Mine Retrospective Initiative. Department of Mining Engineering, Queen’s University, School of Public Policy and Global Affairs and the Norman B. Keevil Institute of Mining Engineering, University of British Columbia. Victoria BC: Anthony Hodge Consultants.
The National Inquiry Into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls. (2019). Reclaiming Power and Place: The Final Report of the National Inquiry Into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls. 1a.
Nellemann, C., & Cameron, R. D. (1998). Cumulative impacts of an evolving oil-field complex on the distribution of calving caribou. Canadian Journal of Zoology, 76(8), 1425-1430.
Reimers, E., & Colman, J. E. (2006). Reindeer and Caribou (Rangifer Tarandus) Response Towards Human Activities. Rangifer, 26(2), 55-71.
Sergeant, C. J., Moore, E. K., Westwood, A. R., Nagorski, S. A., Ebersole, J. L., Chambers, M. D., O'Neal, S. L., Malison, L. R., Hauer, R. F., Whited, C. D., Weitz, J., Capito, M., Connor, M., Frissell, C. A., Knox, G., Lowery, E. D., Macnair, R., McIntyre, J. K., McPhee, M. V., & Skucefewer, N. (2022). Risks of mining to salmonid-bearing watersheds. Science Advances, 8(26). https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abn0929.
The World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future.
Yukon Conservation Society & Yukon Status of Women Council. (2000, September 17). Gaining Ground: Women, mining and the Environment.
Get Involved
Keep up to speed on local conservation issues by following us on social media.
Subscribe to our e-newsletter Tread Lightly.
Share our blogs and posts to help spread the word.
Become a member or donor. Help us reach broader audiences and continue to do our environmental advocacy work.