Classification of Impacted Waterways, Prudent Design Decisions, and Opportunity Costs

Classification of Impacted Waterways, Prudent Design Decisions, and Opportunity Costs

As the owner of property on North Barriere Lake, I have concerns about (1) the way in which impacted water courses are initial project description are classified/described,  (2) the level of prudence exercised in the overall design/placement process of the tailing storage facility, and (3) the way we account for development in 'new' areas when assessing the opportunity cost of a project. 

On page 59 of the initial project description, North Barriere Lake and the Barriere River are described as 'adjacent watercourses'. Although I see that they are not directly overlapping with the project site, they are going to both be impacted directly by the Yellowhead Copper Project since the watershed to the south proceeds as follows: T-Creek -> Harper Creek -> North Barriere Lake -> Barriere River. Is it appropriate to classify them as adjacent waterways since they are both down-stream from the main embankment of the tailings storage facility? Did their classification as 'adjacent' mean less detailed analysis of the environmental impact was (or will be) conducted? My sense from reading the documentation is that there is not explicit recognition that Harper Creek flows into North Barriere Lake before draining via the Barriere River. This lack of recognition makes me concerned that not enough consideration has been paid to the impact on users/residents (animal & human) of North Barriere Lake.

Further to this point, I have more broad concerns about the placement of the main embankment of the tailings storage facility in a location that, in the case of a failure, would result in the tailings being released into a lake that is inhabited for the majority of the year. In the case of a main embankment failure (1) the main access road to North Barriere Lake would be destroyed, and (2) the water level of the lake would rise substantially. What contingency plans would be in place to prevent loss of life in the even of a failure? Will the mine operator be required to be insured to cover any/all losses that result from a failure?

Finally, I would like to know how or if the fact that this area of the province remains largely undeveloped (at least with respect to large mining operations) factors into the decision to move forward with the project? Particularly when their are opportunities to expand pre-existing, long-running mining operations (for example Highland Valley Copper), should we raise the required (1) return on investment and/or (2) safety profile of the proposed new mine (in this case Yellowhead Copper) to account for the fact that we would be disturbing an area that has seen no such development in recent times?