Save the seals

I am writing as a concerned Canadian citizen to state my opposition toward Woodfibre LNG’s proposed amendments to its environmental assessment certificate. I do not support the proposed changes to conditions 3.8 and 6.4, and call on Minister Guilbeault not to approve these changes, which I believe will increase the adverse effects of the project.

I am against Woodfibre LNG'S proposal to reduce the sound monitoring boundary of sea lions and seals from 7km to 125m. At this proximity, seals and sea lions would be exposed to decibels of 190 - equivalent to a gun blast. This is equivalent to repeat shotgun blasts that will permanently damage their hearing, and thus their ability to communicate, find food, escape predators and survive. Steller Sea Lions have only recently returned to Átl’?a7tsem / Howe Sound, and are listed as a species of special concern under the Federal Species at Risk Act (SARA). The federal government has a responsibility to protect this species and their habitat. Transient Orcas would also be affected. Threatened Northern resident killer whales are present in Howe Sound and in proximity to the Woodfire project area. Regularly visiting transient whales’ prey on the pinnipeds in this area. The project area also has known populations of herring spawn, a food seals rely on.

Woodfibre LNG also wants to limit its responsibility for contaminants attributable to the project. This is also problematic due to the site's history as a pulp mill, and it is likely that construction activities will release and remobilize pollutants, despite remediation efforts. Woodfibre LNG chose the site for its project knowing it had historic contamination. The Impact Assessment Agency should not limit the company’s requirements to report and remedy any spills or sediment to that caused by the project itself.

Woodfibre LNG's rationale for amending the condition statements is that they are not "technically or economically feasible." What is at stake is whether it’s acceptable to put the environment in jeopardy because safeguarding conditions are not easy for a project to comply with. But if a project is not able to comply with its conditions, then it should not be able to continue; we should not be relaxing those conditions. We cannot sacrifice species at risk so a fossil fuel project can make more money.

Thank-you,

Melissa Fletcher