TELL THE LIBERALS NOT TO ISSUE PERMITS FOR THE BUILDING OF SITE C DAM

Send A Letter to Your MP Learn About the Issues View Public Comments
Unmute
tell-the-liberals-to-reject-sitec

Real Site C campaign summer

In the coming weeks the federal government will make decisions on permits necessary for continued construction of the Site C dam.

If the government rejects or puts these permits on hold, it would buy time for important legal challenges by First Nations and local landowners to be addressed.

Despite public commitments to respect the rights of Indigenous peoples and ensure transparent and accountable environmental assessment process, Prime Minister Trudeau and his Cabinet have refused to address the many concerns about Site C.

The Prime Minister and his Cabinet need to hear from Members of Parliament in ridings across Canada that their constituents care about the Site C and want the federal government to take action!

You can make a difference by sending a letter to your MP through this site and we encourage you to follow up by phoning your MP and talking to them; better yet, meeting with them in person to make sure they are listening!

After entering your address information, your letter will go directly to the MP representing your riding.  We will also share your letters with Prime Minister Trudeau and key federal ministers.

Points to Raise in Your Letter and Phone Calls

Federal officials repeatedly state that they can’t comment on Site C because “it’s before the courts.” Don’t let them get away with this non-answer!

The court process could take years to resolve, especially if the federal government continues to fight against the First Nations and the landowners in these cases. Meanwhile construction of the dam continues. BC Premier Christy Clark has even said that her goal is to get the dam to “the point of no return.”

BC Hydro has to obtain permits related to continued construction of the dam from the Ministry of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard, as well as from the Ministry of Transport.  They have the power to deny these permits and halt construction, which in turn would allow for a thorough assessment of the project by the BC Utilities Commission and would also allow time for the outstanding court cases by First Nations and landowners to be heard and decided upon.

The joint federal-provincial environmental impact assessment concluded that construction of the dam would severely and permanently undermine Indigenous peoples’ use of the land; harm rare plants and other biodiversity; make fishing unsafe for at least a generation; and submerge burial grounds and other crucial cultural and historical sites.

The federal and provincial approvals for the project were given on the basis of the claim that these serious, permanent harms to the environment and Indigenous culture were “justified” by the benefits of the project but they won’t provide us with any details of this ‘justification’ made behind closed doors.

“The Peace River Valley can provide fruits and vegetables for over a million people per year.  Forty-four percent of the foods that can be economically grown in BC are still being imported!  Fruits and vegetables are the most deficient categories of those food sources. The Peace River valley is capable of producing a variety of crops comparable to BC’s fertile Fraser Valley.  As world prices for food escalate, the land BC Hydro plans to flood for Site C is our food security Plan B. Site C dam may have a 100-year life, but the agricultural land in the Peace Valley will support life in perpetuity.” – Economic agrologist Wendy Holm. BC

The Joint Review Panel was unsatisfied with the need for and the cost of the project as well as the lack of research into alternatives to Site C. The Chair of the Joint Review Panel, economist, Dr. Harry Swain took the unprecedented step of speaking out on these concerns repeatedly in the media, after the governments decided to proceed with Site C without paying heed to these key recommendations.

Additionally, Dr. Swain stated that if the government wished to proceed with Site C, then these matters of concern should be thoroughly assessed by the independent, arms-length-from-government, British Columbia Utilities Commission. The government’s response to this was to state that these particular matters of concern were actually outside the mandate of the Joint Review Panel!  This issue is now before the courts!

Several leading economists from both Canada and the U.S. have determined that better and less expensive alternatives to Site C exist.  Robert McCullough stated that BC Hydro used data for comparisons that was up to 5 years out of date.  The cost of many renewables has come down significantly in the last year or two.  Additionally, alternative projects, including geothermal would provide far more long-term jobs in various locations throughout the province and are less risky as they can be built on an as-needed basis.
BC Hydro has stated in court that the legal implications in respect to the Treaty rights of First Nations were never considered at any point in the decision-making process.

Key Federal Ministers with mandates related to stopping Site C:

(Click on the hyperlinks to view each minister’s mandate letter if you wish)

Minister of Environment and Climate Change, Catherine McKenna

Minister of Indigenous and Northern Affairs, Carolyn Bennett

Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard, Hunter Tootoo

Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, Jody Wilson-Raybould

Minister of Transport, Marc Garneau

Tell your MP and the Trudeau government to stop issuing permits for Site C dam.

Lookup Your MP Button

After submitting your comments you will receive an email confirming your comments have been received and copied to government representatives. We respect your privacy. You will not receive further email from PVEA or Real Hearings unless you opted to join our mailing lists.

(We'd like to inform you of important milestones related to this project.)
true-cost-of-site-c

True Cost of Site C

mountingcosts_1Site C is going to cost you money – a lot of money.

BC Hydro currently estimates that Site C Dam will cost $8.8 billion and “projects losing $800 million in the first 4 years of operation.” (Report of the Joint Review Panel, Site C Clean Energy Project, BC Hydro, May 1, 2014)

BC Hydro has already confirmed rate increases between 2014-2018 of 28%. It is anticipated that cumulatively, rate increases over the next 10 years will be about 45% without Site C. If Site C is approved, BC Hydro intends to increase rates even further to recover the costs of Site C.

Site C: BC’s next White Elephant? The energy from Site C is not needed.

After 28 days of hearings and review of 28,000 pages of documentation, the Joint Review Panel concluded that BC Hydro has failed to prove that we need Site C. Further, they emphasized that because there are significant adverse effects, justification for the project must rest on an unambiguous need for the power.

BC Municipal Associations request a thorough, independent review of Site C

In September 2015, the Union of BC Municipalities (UBCM) passed two resolutions; the first calling for the province to rescind the Order in Council that excluded Site C dam reservoir lands from the Agricultural Land Reserve; and, second, to have the project thoroughly reviewed by the BC Utilities Commission.

Both resolutions were put forward in reaction to the BC Liberal government’s decision to bypass these independent provincial agencies, whose purpose is to ensure that actions such as these are undertaken in the best interests of British Columbians.

More on the UBCM resolutions here.

altenergy_1Alternative sources of power would be more cost effective.

Energy economist Dr. Marvin Shaffer conducted significant research on the viability of Site C and has concluded that there are far less expensive alternatives to Site C.

“BC Hydro is inducing new mining and oil and gas load with the offer of low cost power that it does not have; giving rise to more load growth than what would be economically efficient.”
– Dr. Marvin Shaffer, Economist

Site C is more than three times as costly as the least expensive option,” states expert energy economist Robert McCullough.  McCullough was hired by the Peace Valley Landowner Association to prepare a report on a comparison of alternatives to Site C in March 2015.  Read his report here.

The Joint Review Panel also urged BC Hydro to consider using the tremendous geothermal potential in BC as an alternative to Site C. BC Hydro has confirmed that over 700Mw of geothermal power exists in the province, about two-thirds of the 1,100Mw capacity of Site C.

BC businesses are very concerned about how Site C will affect their bottom line.

The Association of Major Power Customers of BC has stated that Site C is not the right project now; citing additional concerns regarding recent rate increases and the accuracy of BC Hydro’s energy forecasts.

“The huge cost [of Site C] will rob the province of valuable resources that could be used to deliver other needed government services as well as burden the BC economy with debt and high electric power rates that will sap our competitiveness.”
– Dan Potts, former executive director of the Association of Major Power customers of BC

The BC Chamber of Commerce states that with regard to Site C, “… the payoff for the province and its taxpaying citizens won’t justify the huge investment required.” (Business Vancouver, editorial, June 3-9, 2014)

In December, 2014, after the BC government announced that they intend to proceed with Site C, Business Vancouver published an editorial citing their concern that the provincial government has left a multi-billion dollar white elephant under the tree for British Columbians.

a-waste-of-farmland

A Waste of Farmland

floodgraphics_1
Site C dam would result in the largest withdrawal from the agricultural land reserve in BC’s history.

Site C would flood 83km of the Peace River, widening it by up to 3 times, as well as 10km of the Moberly and 14km of the Halfway Rivers.

Over 57,000 acres of agricultural and forested land would be impacted by Site C, including 31,528 acres of Class 1-7 agricultural land and over 17,000 acres of forested land.

wildlifecircles_1

Wildlife impacts in northeastern BC are already significant; building Site C will make it even worse.

The northeastern corner of BC is already ravaged by oil, gas and forestry development: maintaining intact wildlife corridors, spread across large expanses of land, is essential to maintaining the health of many ecosystems and wildlife that depend on them.

“In the near future, the Peace region landscape is likely to be reduced to about one-half of its potential to support certain wide-ranging species… Site C will exacerbate this loss and will further erode our ability to conserve and recover some species.”
– Dr. Clayton Apps, wildlife biologist

 birdcircles_1

Site C would cause significant and irreparable harm to fish and migratory bird species.

Site C would result in the loss of fish in two major tributaries to the Peace River: the migratory Arctic grayling in the Moberly River and the migratory bull trout in the Halfway River. Mountain Whitefish in the Peace River would also disappear.

The destruction of habitat for several migratory bird species, including those classified as ‘at risk’, would also result from Site C. Species impacted include Canada Cap May and Bay-breasted Warblers, Yellow Rail and Nelson’s Sparrow.

agricircles_1

Where is BC going to source fruits and vegetables as traditional food producing lands are being depleted by the effects of global warming?

Droughts in the US are seriously impacting the production of traditional food producing lands, food that British Columbians depend on.

“As world prices for food escalate in response to inevitable pressure, the land in the Peace River Valley is our food security Plan B…. The land to be flooded by Site C is capable of providing a sustainably produced supply of fresh fruits and vegetables to over a million people!”
– Wendy Holm, professional agrologist with over 40 years’ experience in agricultural economics and public policy in Canada and BC

The Peace River Valley provides a unique microclimate where crops one wouldn’t expect to grow this far north actually thrive, including corn, field tomatoes, cantaloupe and watermelon.

“The Peace River Valley has extraordinarily high value for agriculture and it’s my opinion that the public interest is better served by allowing it to continue to sustain citizens through agricultural production rather than destroying it for power production.”
– Eveline Wolterson, soil scientist and physical chemist with 40 years’ experience researching and consulting on agriculture

BC Hydro states that Site C will have a 100-year life; the agricultural land in the Peace River Valley will support life in perpetuity.

There are many energy alternatives, but there are no alternatives to food producing land.

fncircles_1

First Nations are finding their ability to carry out traditional practises are already seriously eroded in their homeland.

The Treaty 8 First Nations Treaty states that they would be able to carry out their treaty rights “… for as long as the sun shines, the rivers flow and the grass grows.”

Site C would significantly impact First Nations’ ability to carry out their cultural practices and rights. Construction of the dam could impact up to 337 archaeological sites, including ancestral gravesites.


The financial costs of the significant biodiversity losses are completely ignored by BC Hydro.

“… Biological diversity is a global asset of great value to present and future generations and vital to humanity’s economic and social development…. The Panel’s assessment indicates a change in biodiversity… that significant effects would occur in the long-term… [and have] an effect on the sustainability of these resources… that the loss of biodiversity… also has a financial cost.”
– Report of the Joint Review Panel, Site C Clean Energy Project, BC Hydro, May 1, 2014

protect-the-future

Protect Our Future

childrencircles_1

What kind of a future would we be leaving our children?

Why would we allow our governments to proceed with Site C? Northeastern BC is already ravaged by industrial development; we cannot allow this precious, relatively untouched jewel – the Peace River Valley – to be destroyed as well.

It takes up to 600 years to produce 2cm depth of soil: this critical food producing land in the unique Peace River Valley cannot be replaced! Destruction of habitat for fish, wildlife and birds cannot continue! The ability of First Nations to continue their cultural practises cannot continue to be eroded.

Site C would cause the loss of habitat for several fish species including migratory Arctic Grayling in the Moberly River, migratory bull trout in the Halfway River, and mountain whitefish in the Peace River. Habitat for several migratory birds would also be destroyed by Site C, including Canada, Cape May and Bay-breasted Warbler; Yellow Rail; and Nelson’s Sparrow.

circlechalk_1

Please protect our children’s future. Protect BC.

The Joint Review Panel has made it clear: we don’t need Site C. They have acknowledged that there are many significant, unmitigable and irreparable impacts that will occur if Site C proceeds. Additionally, they have stated that alternatives such as geothermal should be seriously considered.

You can be the change we all want to see. Sign our petition to tell the federal and provincial decision-makers on this project that Site C is NOT in the best interests of British Columbians!

You can also support the work of the PVEA by donating, ordering a print of “Peace River” by Cindy Vincent, or contacting us about volunteer opportunities

Site C would cause significant impacts to the City of Fort St. John and surrounding areas.

At the hearings on Site C, the City of Fort St. John and directors of rural areas expressed significant concerns regarding the impacts of the project on the social fabric and infrastructure in the local area.

“If BC plans to continue to be a powerhouse for economic development, we cannot have projects built on the shoulders of communities…. The city remains concerned that the location, magnitude, and duration of construction of the proposed Site C project threatens to impact the quality of life that the community of Fort St. John has worked so hard to create…. These issues range from direct costs to the city during Site C construction, water supply, and traffic, to health care, policing, security, education, social services, and many others.”
– City of Fort St. John Mayor Lori Ackerman, to the Joint Review Panel, Jan 18, 2014

public-comments

Public Comments Asking the Federal Liberals to Deny Permits for Site C Dam

First NameLast NameCityProvince / StateMy concerns about Site C damEntry Date
AndreaMorisonFort St. JohnBritish Columbia

In this day and age...is a massive dam that destroys 107 km of river valley considered 'PROGRESS'?! It can't be.

We voted in a new government and a prime minister that we thought was truly progressive, not a government that still used old, backward thinking about how to generate wealth for our country.

What happened?

Why do we keep hearing the rhetoric about a 'truly green economy' and 'honoring First Nations'? It is appalling when we ask about Site C and all we get are these repetitive, meaningless responses.

The federal government has the power to make a difference. In the coming weeks, permits for construction of Site C will be sought by BC Hydro through federal government departments. It's time for you to put pressure on them to pause and seriously examine and consider the magnitude of damage that this unnecessary project will cause. Consider the key recommendations of the Joint Review Panel: this dam is not needed on the timeline set forth; the costs and energy demand forecasts associated with this dam need more thorough examination; and, more research into alternatives must take place.

The cost of alternative energy has come down considerably in the last two years. According to expert Robert McCullough, Site C is 3x more expensive than the least expensive alternative.
Alternatives are far less risky: they can be built on an as-needed basis, cost less and can provide more jobs in a variety of locations.

The need for the power from Site C is unproven, Christy Clark is running around trying to sell the power to Alberta now that the LNG hasn't come through - it's ridiculous.

How can Canada endorse this project for which there are numerous, credible arguments against? Many experts have studied and subsequently decried this project. The Chair of the Joint Review Panel on Site C, Dr. Harry Swain has a doctorate in economics. He is not satisfied with the business case for this project. He is so upset about governments' decision to ignore key recommendations from the Panel's report that he has made the unprecedented move of speaking out publicly against this project; and he continues to do so.

Let's work together to ensure that the future of Canada is truly green and progressive, afterall it's 2016.

2016-04-21 23:34:08
RitaNeighborFort St. JohnBritish Columbia

The Federal Government has committed to a new relationship with Indigenous peoples and should honor that commitment. Construction of the Site C Dam will forever impact the cultural use of the land and water, and as it was written in Treaty 8, must be honored. This is the 3rd dam on a already heavily burdened Heritage River. The cost in permanent loss to the Indigenous peoples cultural practices, sacred sites and use of the land and water can not be mitigated. Why is the Site C dam being pushed forward "Beyond the point of no return" as stated by BC Premier Christy Clark? Pushed forward when there are still court cases ongoing? Please don't say you cannot comment because it is before the courts. I am asking "Why is the dam proceeding with cases before the courts? Why is the Site C Project happening when everything I research confirms the justification details were not made public? Any future permits that are to be issued by the Federal or Provincial Government are not justified by the supposed benefits of this mega project and in my opinion as a taxpayer/ratepayer should not be given until due process has been established. Thank you.

2016-04-22 01:53:43
HilaryKnightVictoria, British ColumbiaBritish Columbia

I have to shake my head to remind myself that the Clark government has every intention to pushing through the lunatic Site C project. Help! STOP THEM! This is priceless farmland they're flooding at a time when food security is more important than ever! This is land held sacred by First Nations! STOP THESE MORONS NOW!

2016-04-22 21:15:04
DavidWaterhouseVictoriaBritish Columbia

Dear Prime Minister Trudeau,
Site C Dam was never part of a democratic process. I now quote BC Energy Minister Bill Bennett. When asked why he had prevented the BCUC from doing their jobs (taking part in Site C Hearings) he said, "We don't want these hearings getting bogged down by a bunch of BCUC questions."

Dr. Harry Swain, former Chair of the Joint Review Panel on Site C, with a doctorate in economics, has made the unprecedented move of publicly stating that the need for, cost and alternatives to this project were not sufficiently researched and that the dam should not proceed until these matters are fully assessed and justified. Numerous other experts have done their research and stated the same.

Prime Minister, please do the right thing. Halt the C Dam construction. Let the BCUC do the job our democracy intended.

David Waterhous

2016-04-22 21:15:37
MarcKaiserNorth VancouverBritish Columbia

Dear Mr Wilkinson,

I am writing you to ask you to voice my opposition to the construction of the Site C dam in Northern British Columbia. There are so many reasons why it is not a good idea to go ahead with the project. One that I find compelling is the fact that the dam is opposed by the First Nation's communities in the area, as well as the organization representing all native people in BC. Your government came into office promising to seek a new relationship with native peoples, but this project is being pushed forward in spite of their opposition. Another reason is that the dam will also end up flooding a huge tract of productive farmland, something which is at a premium in BC. Also, It is not a green project if power from the dam ends up being used in the LNG industry. When everything is factored in, it is probably greener to burn coal in China then natural gas made in BC. It looks as if this summer will be another hot one in BC with many wildfires. When is our government going to start taking serious action to address climate change. Perhaps no to Site C could be a start.

Your truly,
Marc Kaiser (North Vancouver)

2016-04-22 21:23:10
MarcKaiserNorth VancouverBritish Columbia

Dear Mr Wilkinson,

I am writing you to ask you to voice my opposition to the construction of the Site C dam in Northern British Columbia. There are so many reasons why it is not a good idea to go ahead with the project. One that I find compelling is the fact that the dam is opposed by the First Nation's communities in the area, as well as the organization representing all native people in BC. Your government came into office promising to seek a new relationship with native peoples, but this project is being pushed forward in spite of their opposition. Another reason is that the dam will also end up flooding a huge tract of productive farmland, something which is at a premium in BC. Also, It is not a green project if power from the dam ends up being used in the LNG industry. When everything is factored in, it is probably greener to burn coal in China then natural gas made in BC. It looks as if this summer will be another hot one in BC with many wildfires. When is our government going to start taking serious action to address climate change. Perhaps no to Site C could be a start.

Your truly,
Marc Kaiser (North Vancouver)

2016-04-22 21:23:13
PatriciaSwiftVicoriaBritish Columbia

I visited the Peac River Valley last summer as a participant in the Paddle for the Peace. I was fortunate to meet with the Boons and other local farmers and ranchers. This land is extremely significant in its agricultural productivity and for any realistic possibility of food security in this part of the Province.

It's unconscionable that clear-cutting and habitat destruction is taking place while there are currently FNs and land owners cases before the courts. This is not the way my government should behave. The unnecessary
speed of destruction, with total disregard for consequences which can never be mitigated, is shameful.

Numerous experts have indicated that this project is not even necessary! Please speak up loudly and forcefully against the Site C dam. Healthy, productive farmland and the honouring of Treaty 8 rights are a much greater heritage for future generations than this temporary and foolish man-made construction.

2016-04-22 21:24:50
JamesLeeBlack Diamond Alberta

This is unnecessary in that BC has more power generation than they can currently use for the next 20 years, and by then there will be so many more clean sources of energy that this Site C Dam will be rendered obslete. The Valley is a very fertile farming community and growing clean food is necessary and wanted. Viable arable land is precious as we continue to develop. Please Say no to the Site C Dam!

2016-04-22 21:25:17
JamesLeeBlack Diamond Alberta

This is unnecessary in that BC has more power generation than they can currently use for the next 20 years, and by then there will be so many more clean sources of energy that this Site C Dam will be rendered obslete. The Valley is a very fertile farming community and growing clean food is necessary and wanted. Viable arable land is precious as we continue to develop. Please Say no to the Site C Dam!

2016-04-22 21:25:20
JosetteWierSmithersBritish Columbia

As the Hon. Christy Clark is quoted in the media , it is to contribute to tar sands development, which is unacceptable. Fossil fuels must be kept in the ground and there is no reason to tax hydro rate payers for another subsidy to the tar sands, and the loss of agricultural land for BC.

2016-04-22 21:27:28
GeorgePayerleRoberts CreekBritish Columbia

Pam, I'm sure you share at least some of my concerns about Site C. It is a shameless act by a premier intent only on serving corporate interests. We BCers don't need the power. Only her insane LNG interests do. The Peace is a beautiful area which contains a great deal of the arable land to be found in our largely vertical province. Christy Clark has no interest in any of this and needs to be voted out of office - which should happen at the next election, not far distant. If she is finally deposed (as Stephen Harper, exemplar of similar policies and practices was) the next government is almost certain to void the Peace plan. And yet, already clearcutting is taking place. Please influence the Trudeau government to disallow Site C!

Thanks,
George Payerle
Your constituent

2016-04-22 21:33:45
MelodieGodsmanHudson's HopeBritish Columbia

- the complete and utter waste of tax-payer/rate-payer hard earned dollars, possibly leading to a bankrupt province.

- The complete and unbelievably ridiculous waste of valuable farmland on a planet that can't supply enough food.

- The loss of wildlife, wildlife corridors, a wetlands conservation site, a hundred years of tourism through Beautiful BC Peace Valley

- destruction of even more Archeological, paleontological sites than the previous two dams have already taken

- NO lucrative sale for the power produced now or a decade from now. Hydro electric sales are steadily declining as other sources of energy are implemented

- BC Hydro should have a thorough forensic accounting of all corporations included under the BC Hydro license BEFORE another dime is spent on any old or new projects

- Partnering with foreign companies with bad reputations is poor business for anyone let alone our "trusted" government

2016-04-22 21:33:47
Theresa Dunnigan Kelowna British Columbia

Site C Dam is not going to help the citizens of B.C. but it will harm our province as well as all of the farms and orchards and other things we can grow in the area instead of flooding it.

The Liberals are also not taking into consideration the First Nations and treaty that need to be respected. The federal government needs to drop court cases on this issue and look to other means such as geothermal and other renewable resources in place of flooding this area. The land owners and First Nations people need to be listened to instead of ignored and disregarded. The Liberals must remembered we put you in power and we can and will take you out if you continue to not listen to the people of Canada and continue the corporations big banks and elites agendas. We will not stand for it.
In addition to No for Site C Dam, also No to TPP, No to Geoengineering, No to Bill C51 , No to trade with Saudi Arabia. What part of No do you all not understand? I feel politicians have common sense sucked out of their heads when they get into power. Be the change Liberals. Or we will be against you and you will be removed.

Sincerely,

Theresa Dunnigan

2016-04-22 21:36:15
JohnDafoeHalfmoon BayBritish Columbia

Honourable Justin Trudeau

On the eve of your signing the Paris Accord on Climate Change, even with its moderate conditions, Site C Dam the carbon ramifications of reservoirs alone and loss of timber lands are bad enough. Site C power is linked to and becoming linked to massive export and development of LNG and Tar Sands Bitumen. Together the carbon contribution to Climate Change is keeping BC, Western Canada and the Country in bad repute, with redemption getting farther away to impossible.

Unbiased analysis of atmospheric Carbon Contribution the Site C Dam and its effects must stop the project. Besides the point of no return declaration of BC’s Premier Clarke, there is underlying a point of no return Carbon Footprint for Site C Dam.

Sincerely, John

Coastwise Guide and Consulting, John Dafoe

8945 Redrooffs Rd.
Halfmoon Bay, B.C.
V0N 1Y2

Ph: 604-885-6135
e-mail: [email protected]

2016-04-22 21:36:17
BonnieWedelAbbotsfordBritish Columbia

The most important concern I have about site c is the loss of farmland that would occur if the dam is built. The power is probably not going to be needed for Canadians, but the agricultural land will be a necessity. Please do what you can to stop this dam!

2016-04-22 21:37:42
DouglasJacksonVancouverBritish Columbia

Dear,
Prime Minister Trudeau.
Local Member Of Parliament Jody Wilson-Raybould.
Re- Site C Dam
As a Canadian, I am horrified at the actions of the government of British Columbia in their zealous pursuit to construct the Site C Dam project.
There are so many reasons that his project should never have been considered int he first place, that I do not know where to start. From The Joint Review Panels findings to the severe environmental local, up and downstream repercussions that the destruction of Peace River Valley would cause, the loss of valuable food production and fertile farmland, First Nations treaty violations and their ongoing legal challenges, the secretive planning and questionable lack of disclosure to the residents of British Columbia concerning the initial planning of this project and foremost, for the complete disrespectful lack of regard for due process that the government of British Columbia has shown to all concerned parties.
If there was a dire need for this project to support the current or near future energy requirements for the continued growth and needs of British Columbia, the site chosen by the government of B.C. would still be in question. Further hydroelectric production is not required to supply the current needs of the province and existing ample surplus is available for domestic needs well into the future.
This project does not make sense, there is no need. The chosen site does not make sense as the Peace River Valley is a valuable asset to the province as it stands. The costs do not make sense. The taxpayers of British Columbia cannot afford to waste billions of dollars on hydroelectric surplus when education, health care and attention to existing hydro electric infrastructure is urgently required. The environmental costs do not make sense as the loss of the Peace River Valley forever, is a poor trade off for excess hydroelectric surplus. British Columbia has pressing needs in so many areas that to ignore these immediate needs, in the pursuit of a future cash cow amounts to nothing less than incompetence on the part of the current provincial government. Lastly, the government of British Columbia is once again preparing to dishonor past agreements to First Nations in the most disrespectful way possible.

Is there is an agency, qualified expert or panel, federal or provincial which can justify this project, if so I would like access to these reports and conclusions. It is time for the federal government to step in and stop the ongoing destruction taking place right now in the Peace River Valley. The future of this ill-conceived project is not a foregone conclusion and for the provincial government to assume so is just one more example of the disrespectful, bullying position the government of British Columbia has adopted. To continue construction of this project while this matter is before the courts is a travesty of justice and makes a mockery of the Canadian judicial process.

Respectfully,

Douglas Jackson

2016-04-22 21:39:00
MarypatGreenHagensborgBritish Columbia

Let's Stop Site C!!!!
Thank you!

2016-04-22 21:41:22
Nancy LaneMacgregorVictoriaBritish Columbia

My newest concern is that Premier Christie Clark is offering Premier Rachel Notley a deal to exchange electricity for oil pipelines. In other words she thinks that BC residents will OK site C dam so that she can pretend that the LNG industry is green, while selling Alberta energy , in exchange for dirty oil running through our land to the sea for export to China to burn. I find this whole concept disgusting.
Site C dam threatens First Nations territory, wild country and all it's inhabitants, farm land which we must preserve for current and future generations. We live in a time of global warming that threatens all of us, food production and water resources in particular.
A study of BC Hydro's economics will also lead to some very interesting arguments against any trust in this 9 billion dollar effort.
Save the Peace. We call upon you to lead us wisely into a better future.
Sincerely, NL Macgregor

2016-04-22 21:45:57
Carolyn L.HerbertNepeanOntario

As both the Prime Minister and Minister of the Environment have ratified the Paris international agreement to hold global warming to 1.5 degrees, and as methane emissions increase our contribution to global warming, both in the fracking process as well as when the LNG is used at its destination for which we must take responsibility, I am appealing to you to stop British Columbia's plan to allow BC Hydro to build the Site C dam on the Peace River for the express purpose of providing the energy to do the fracking process.

While the new Liberal (federal) government has expressly promised to have a better relationship with First Nations, the Provincial Liberal government is ramming the preparation work for this unwanted dam while the courts still have not decided whether the permanent destruction of First Nation traditional rights must be set aside "in the best interests" of the economy. The joint federal-provincial environmental impact assessment concluded that construction of the dam would severely and permanently undermine Indigenous peoples' use of land, harm rare plants and other biodiversity,
make fishing unsafe for at least a generation because the contaminated waters would contain mercury, would submerge burial grounds and other crucial cultural and historical sites.

The United States is now removing dams because of the damage to migration of salmon, a vital food source.

The proposed Site C dam would permanently remove from use some of the most prime growing land in our country. At a time when food insecurity is a real concern, especially up North, this land could provide exceptionally wide varieties of fruits and vegetables. Now there is a good water supply. However, if fracking is to be permitted, water will be permanently removed from the water cycle as what is used for fracking is contaminated with carcinogenic chemicals.

The Joint Review Panel was unsatisfied with the need for and the cost of the project as well as a lack of research into alternatives to Site C. The BC Utilities Commission did not make this independent assessment. Geothermal energy production has not been considered yet BC is a prime location for this form of energy for potential mining activities in the area. LNG is in surplus supply in the world so it would cost more for BC to produce it than would be returned to the economy.

In this instance I believe it is in Canada's best interest to have federal officials intervene immediately while the courts are dealing with these issues, and stop the destructive activities now being done to the area. The Premier is so determined to push this construction forward that she has stated that her goal is to get the dam to the point of no return. Trampling on citizen and First Nations rights and destroying Canada's climate control goals is unjust and fool-hardy. There is no justification for any province's government to over-rule Federal goals when better relations among us and the rest of the world is in the balance.

2016-04-22 21:52:44
AshleyCarterVancouverBritish Columbia

Dear sir/madam,

I am primarily concerned with the flooding of the Peace River Valley, and the fertile farmland contained within that region. This farmland will be vital to feed Canadians in the years to come as the climate shifts to warmer drier conditions, food prices soar, and food sovereignty becomes priority.
A close second is my concern with the actual power output of the Site C dam and the lack of current demand in BC. The Site C dam power output is slated for fracking operations in northern BC, tar sands projects in Alberta, and export to the USA- British Columbians are paying for this project with our taxes- a project that many people, myself included, DO NOT SUPPORT.
Third in my concerns is the opposition to the construction of the dam by First Nations peoples in the region, and the commitment of the current Liberal government to make good in honoring the treaties of past. The Peace River Valley is home to sacred sites of cultural significance to these people, and they will be destroyed by the construction of the dam.
I feel that there has been a failure of due diligence on the part of the government in researching the impacts of this project and, as a concerned Canadian citizen and British Columbia resident, demand further inquiry and assessment of this project.

Thank you for you time,
Ashley Carter

2016-04-22 21:53:08
CarolynBatemanSookeBritish Columbia

Dear Mr. Garrison:
I was such a pleasure to speak with you at Creatively United for the Planet in Victoria last weekend. I enjoyed our discussion about the language used in political campaigns and I was very encouraged to see you wearing a Stop Site C button.

So I know you are supportive of efforts in BC to stop this unnecessary, multi-billion-dollar mega hydro project in the Peace Valley. I would ask, then, that you do all you can (and I imagine you already are!) to convince your fellow MPs, especially those who are new to the House. They may not realize that Site C requires some permits directly from the federal government and that denying these permits could make the difference in efforts to stop this project, which our children will be paying for for years to come, is destroying this rich agricultural region and disrespecting First Nations and their treaties.

Thank you for all you do for the environment on this Earth Day 2016. I am grateful for your strong convictions and also your belief in non-violent communications.

2016-04-22 21:55:23
MichaelHeidenCrestonBritish Columbia

I am born and raised in British Columbia and have seen the steady destruction of our most precious resource; our beautiful forests, rivers, and ocean teaming with wildlife. This is not acceptable or justifiable for job or economic gains by a few greedy corporations, least of which is our own elected government, who are our representatives who work for us to preserve and protect our way of life for eternity.
The present Liberal Government treats all our resources and First Nations treaty rights as theirs to,extract, violate and disrespect at every turn with no thoughts or concerns for the future, Native treaties, only money and jobs for the short term.
Site C dam is a misguided plan, unnecessary at this time, and will destroy so much for what?
Who is it for? Was it the Fracking in the North for LNG to China, no, for sale to California, apparently not.... or now maybe to power the dwindling oilsands. Only if we agree to pipelines to the coast and huge increases in tanker traffic. Who does our government represent? Not us it seems....
This is not vision or leadership...it is exploitation for political grandeur, and huge profits for others, and must be stopped. A healthy economy doesn't have to entail destroying your home. Please. I and most other British Columbians love this province, intact and healthy for the future.
Lets become leaders in innovation, clean energy and show some respect for our land and water.

2016-04-22 21:56:05
NADENEMORTONvictoriaBritish Columbia

please please please, listen to the people of british columbia who are exceptionally concerned about numerous aspects of this archaic project. we have crumbling dams that need repair. we have a pristine peace river valley which is fertile, much needed grazing and agricultural land. we have first nations who value their historic fishing and hunting areas. and of course, there is the tremendous cost of this project which will affect my children and grandchildren for the next thirty years.
it is earth day. in thirty years we will need our agricultural land base more than ever as drought sweeps the planet. in thity years wind and solar will be the norm.
please,please, please, do not encourage this.
thank you.

2016-04-22 21:58:36
AgnesWattsVancouverBritish Columbia

It's not needed. It's being built to supply water for fracking, which is also not needed. It will destroy vast areas of fertile potential agricultural land, which will become more valuable as the south becomes a dust bowl. It is rejected by the First Nations people who've lived there for millennia. There are several court cases which should have precedence, before any clearing or other preparation takes place, yet this government is steam-rolling ahead, without the legal right or the necessity to do so. Power could be acquired, as needed, with much less expensive and damaging methods, Renewable technologies are available which could do the job of supplying energy for much less cost and much less damage.This is still not a "done deal". Don't approve or issue any more permits. Stop it now!

2016-04-22 22:07:09
ShelleyOuelletteFort St JohnBritish Columbia

Food security should be on the top of our priority list. Peace Valley food can be shipped to northern communities at a fraction of the cost they are paying now. Northern BC has a high percentage of children living under the poverty line, growing food where it is consumed will alleviate that.

2016-04-22 22:07:25
BarbaraDaleyFt St JohnBritish Columbia

Dear Mr Zimmer, There has got to be a way for the Federal Government to allow for time and space to REALLY look into Site C. This current situation is unacceptable for so many reasons. First of all, there are challenges still before the Courts.Treaty 8 is being disrespected. Environmental permits should be WITHHELD until the BC UTILITIES Commission is allowed to study the project. Sincerely
Barbara Daley

2016-04-22 22:21:54
JohnPrenticeWhite Rock British Columbia

This project has been fast tracked through the system. Since Canada has weak Endangered Species Act and weak environmental laws because of Harper Administration's corruption in changing the laws in the past ten years.

I do not accept the idea that we need electricity as it is a provincial Liberal Govt.'s idea. I think we need to save the Peace River intact and the other values of the land HAVE NOT BEEN ADDRESSED.?

Reason is both Canadian and Provincial Environmental Assessment Agencies have been corrupted. Therefore i wish that you would reject this Site C dam proposal on grounds of violations to the Wildlife Act and SARA. and our First Nations culture.

2016-04-22 22:38:50
Ronald SOsborneLadysmithBritish Columbia

Site C Dam project has NOT been subjected to true and accurate critique as to Environmental concerns ( which are enormous ) Site C has NOT been sent to BC Utilities Commission. Site C is largely a pet project of Premier Christie Clarke.. to fuel "her" LNG dreams.
In other words Is Site C Dam needed at this time IF at all. !!

2016-04-22 22:41:02
WarrenFehrFort st JohnBritish Columbia

We DONOT need site c dam
We can use wind power,
Solar power and wave power

2016-04-22 22:44:16
Sheila PrattMaple RidgeBritish Columbia

Our new government says it would like better relations with First Nations; what better way to show the truth of this claim than to respect their wishes with regard to this needless project.

According to the experts, the power Site C will produce is not necessary. Some suggest it will be used for LNG production, and the latest I've read is that LNG production will soon be a White Elephant for BC as other forms, sustainable forms, of energy are becoming more attractive.

The prime agricultural land lost to this project will be needed as imported foods become more expensive or non-existent. The environmental destruction can not be justified.

The cost to the taxpayers is overwhelming and inexcusable.

The jobs promised for this project would be better planned for sustainable energy projects.

If British Columbians were given a choice between a sustainable project with with jobs or jobs on a destructive project, as Site C is, I believe they would choose the former.

Were campaign promises just empty words?

2016-04-22 22:45:25
DerekBoveeCharlie LakeBritish Columbia

I am writing this letter to express my concerns regarding the Site C dam project. It is my feelings that:

1: We can not afford it
2: We can not do this damage to our environment
3: We do not need it
4: It's 2016, we can do better than this and set an example for the world

If this project is not stopped by the current gov'ts in office I will be voting against the incumbents in the next elections.

Thank you for your time
Derek Bovee

2016-04-22 22:46:39
Sheila PrattMaple RidgeBritish Columbia

Our new government says it would like better relations with First Nations; what better way to show the truth of this claim than to respect their wishes with regard to this needless project.

According to the experts, the power Site C will produce is not necessary. Some suggest it will be used for LNG production, and the latest I've read is that LNG production will soon be a White Elephant for BC as other forms, sustainable forms, of energy are becoming more attractive.

The prime agricultural land lost to this project will be needed as imported foods become more expensive or non-existent. The environmental destruction can not be justified.

The cost to the taxpayers is overwhelming and inexcusable.

The jobs promised for this project would be better planned for sustainable energy projects.

If British Columbians were given a choice between a sustainable project with with jobs or jobs on a destructive project, as Site C is, I believe they would choose the former.

Were campaign promises just empty words?

2016-04-22 22:47:16
dianeleekamloopsBritish Columbia

The Cost is prohibitive....when we COULD have Solar, wind or Ocean turbines

2016-04-22 23:04:49
BrianCyrVancouverBritish Columbia

This is a letter to ask our govt to look at this project and to understand it is not needed.
This land is far more valuable to the nation and the Peace River Valley people and wildlife, than the power generated for elsewhere.
There are so many other ways to clean, sustainable energy without this massive destruction of farmland and habitat. It is not always just about our economy and the planet is not just for humans.
Be the good stewards we now need on earth to sustain the land and to pass it to future generations.
Please, I beg you to do the right thing and stop Site C

Brian Cyr

2016-04-22 23:08:23
PatMossSmithersBritish Columbia

I am concerned that we are going to devastate a region and destroy very valuable farmland for a hydroelectric project that isn't needed at this time.

2016-04-22 23:10:37
SusannaKaljurCourtenayBritish Columbia

I am your local constituent and I am deeply concerned that the federal government is saying that they can't comment on Site C because "it's before the courts", meanwhile Premier Christy Clark has even said her goal is to get the dam to "the point of no return".
The federal government should thoroughly asses any future permits related to construction of Site C consistent with its commitments to protect the environment and Indigenous rights.

The joint federal-provincial environmental impact assessment concluded that construction of the dam would severely and permanently undermine Indigenous peoples’ use of the land; harm rare plants and other biodiversity; make fishing unsafe for at least a generation; and submerge burial grounds and other crucial cultural and historical sites. The Joint Review Panel was unsatisfied with the need for and the cost of the project as well as the lack of research into alternatives to Site C. The Chair of the Joint Review Panel, economist, Dr. Harry Swain took the unprecedented step of speaking out on these concerns repeatedly in the media, after the governments decided to proceed with Site C without paying heed to these key recommendations.

Additionally, Dr. Swain stated that if the government wished to proceed with Site C, then these matters of concern should be thoroughly assessed by the independent, arms-length-from-government, British Columbia Utilities Commission. The government’s response to this was to state that these particular matters of concern were actually outside the mandate of the Joint Review Panel! This issue is now before the courts!

Several leading economists from both Canada and the U.S. have determined that better and less expensive alternatives to Site C exist. Robert McCullough stated that BC Hydro used data for comparisons that was up to 5 years out of date. The cost of many renewables has come down significantly in the last year or two. Additionally, alternative projects, including geothermal would provide far more long-term jobs in various locations throughout the province and are less risky as they can be built on an as-needed basis.
BC Hydro has stated in court that the legal implications in respect to the Treaty rights of First Nations were never considered at any point in the decision-making process.
The federal and provincial approvals for the project were given on the basis of the claim that these serious and permanent harms to the environment and First Nations were "justified" but they won't provide any details of this justification made behind close doors.
This is an extremely costly and unnecessary project. Please step up and speak up for British Columbians before it truly is too late.

2016-04-22 23:12:42
BrendaErvenVictoriaBritish Columbia

The Government KNOWS all of the reason why Site C is not only NOT necessary but an environment and financial disaster waitintg to happen. 8 Billion dollars for Hydro that is NOT needed. Flooding large areas of land used for agriculture and with fragile ecosystems. There are MANY more environmentally friendly things to do instead of building ANOTHER dam. AND THE PEOPLE D NOT WANT IT! LISTEN TO YOUR CONSTITUENTS!!!

2016-04-22 23:37:37
CharleneSimonVictoriaBritish Columbia

After the publicity of the Liberal Government about a new relationship with First Nations, I am really upset that the Government is ignoring the West Moberly First Nation's plea for a halt to the Site C dam work, and forcing them to appeal to the courts to protect their territories.

I have read that the area would feed a million people because of its' climate, and with the cost of food and projected shortages, this is a very valuable use of the land.

I have read expert comments, including a former CEO of BC Hydro, that the power is not needed and that taxpayer money will be saved by postponing this project while proper feasability, economic and environmental studies are conducted.

I have read that Premier Clark is trying to push this project ahead to the point of no return and to date there has already been clearcutting and roadbuilding. I have also read that the power from the dam will be provided to proposed LNG operations at a taxpayer subsidized rate, to build an industry whose product is in an economic freefall.

Why have we heard nothing from the Federal Government on this, as this project received some federal permits, apparently after the election was called and during a period between Governments. How were these permits issued and by whom?

Why have the permits not been suspended until the Courts have heard and ruled? The way this has been done is very upsetting, and I want to see my new Government take a stand that is fair.

2016-04-22 23:40:27
williamchasefort st johnBritish Columbia

The dam is being built illegally, and Christie Clark needs to be charged with Contempt of the Canadian Legal System.

The dam has not been proven to be needed.

The dam destroys valuable farmland, which we will sorely regret losing in future years.

Not to mention ALL the lies old to us by the Govt. of BC and by BC hydro

2016-04-22 23:44:57
BetCecillgibsonsBritish Columbia

Dear Pam,
The more I think about the Site C dam, the more uneasy I become. This project is a disaster from many different angles. Treaty rights are being ignored. Farmland in a micro climate that can feed a million people a year will be flooded. Irreplaceable cultural sites and traditional hunting/trapping/fishing/ grounds will be drowned. The vital Yellowstone to Yukon migration route will be disrupted. Treaty rights are being infringed and the honour of the crown is being once again besmirched in 2016.
The Site C dam project itself will release greenhouse gases from the decay of vegetation. Never mind that one of the reasons for its' existence is to create electricity for LNG dreams that depend on fracking. Fracking is another disastrous technology that is certainly NOT green, releases greenhouses gases and contaminates wells and water tables with various toxic chemicals.
Some federal permits were issued after the writ was dropped. Although this may not be technically illegal; it certainly is not customary in Canadian parliamentary practice.
Construction is proceeding despite at least three court challenges that have not been decided. That, in itself, is thoroughly immoral if not actually illegal.
Most importantly, this is not a purely local issue that only affects the people that live, work and farm in the immediate area.
Site C is an issue that affects all British Colombians. This project is currently estimated to cost nine billion dollars. It will raise all of our electricity rates and reduce our food security that is already threatened by climate change and by the drought in California.
The worst of it is-we don't need the electricity.
We do need food. We need food, water, conservation of energy, investment in real green technology and to honour our treaties and agreements with First Nations peoples.
I urge the federal government to initiate a pause in providing any new project permits.
The Provincial Government has refused to allow Site C to be reviewed by the BC Utilities Commission. The  need for the energy and the economics of the project must first be fairly and independently examined.  We need a broader look at the overall picture of this disastrous project.
We have an historic opportunity to go down a different path, to create a different road, to heal some of the wounds of our relationship with our First Nations and with the planet that must sustain us all.
I urge the BC Federal Liberal Caucus and the Federal government as a whole to take this historic opportunity.
To allow Site C to continue will make a lie of The Liberal commitment to a new relationship with First Nations and to the commitment to create a new economy that reduces greenhouse gases and our impact on the climate.
Thank you for your time and attention.
Bet Cecill

2016-04-22 23:46:58
J EHammillGibson’s LandingBritish Columbia

Dear Pamela Goldsmith-Jones and other Parliamentarians:

I took upon myself the responsibility to drive north to the Peace River Valley from my home in Gibson’s Landing for the purpose of informing myself about the issue of the Site C dam.

I learned a lot. I saw the beauty of the landscape, I saw the fertile fields of the bench lands, I met the people who depend on the bounty of the land, many of whom have done so for millennia, I paddled the waters sacred to First Nations people.

I learned from an agronomist why the area the BC government plans to inundate and industrialize is so fertile that it has the potential to feed a million people. (It’s because of melting glaciers’ deposits, the wind, the direction the river flows relative to the angle of the sunshine--a unique set of happy circumstances.) Can you foresee how important that secure source of food is going to be in a climate- and water-challenged world?

The joint federal-provincial environmental impact assessment concluded that construction of the dam would severely and permanently undermine Indigenous peoples’ use of the land, harm rare plants and other biodiversity, make fishing unsafe for at least a generation, and submerge burial grounds and other crucial cultural and historical sites. All of this with no apparent justification for the project! Even the joint review panel was unconvinced of the need for (and the cost of!) the project. BC simply does not require the extra power. By the time we are likely to need more power, we will be long served by better, more sustainable sources of energy (or we will be beyond help, living in a world of chaos).

I understand that there are pressures on you. I see the grand promises of the Liberal campaign and the new Liberal government in Paris falling by the wayside one by one. I hear the lengths the prime minister and other ministers are going to to twist bad ideas into “reasonable” policy.

But I am hoping that you will exercise some independence of thought, of opinion, of ethics and do what is right here. Many ministers have mandates that bestow authority and responsibilty on them that should stop this egregiously wrong project. For them it boils down to this: Do not issue permits related to the construction of Site C that are inconsistent with your government’s stated commitments to protect the environment and Indigenous rights. Forget the “politics” of it all, and do what is plainly the right thing to do. Stop Site C.

I will look forward to hearing from you. Please do not slough off a reply using that old canard about not being able to comment while the issue is before the courts. That is not actually true. (You can check that with your legal advisors.) In any case, I don’t wish to wait the years court cases are likely to take before I get a reasoned reply.

In closing, I respectfully suggest that you too drive or fly up to the Peace River Valley and see and learn for yourself what is at stake there. I guarantee you will come away not only with a fuller appreciation of the importance of your actions and decisions on this file, but also with clarity around what you need to do.

Hoping sanity will prevail over special interests, I remain,
Yours truly,
Judith Hammill

2016-04-22 23:48:05
BetCecillgibsonsBritish Columbia

Dear Pam,
The more I think about the Site C dam, the more uneasy I become. This project is a disaster from many different angles. Treaty rights are being ignored. Farmland in a micro climate that can feed a million people a year will be flooded. Irreplaceable cultural sites and traditional hunting/trapping/fishing/ grounds will be drowned. The vital Yellowstone to Yukon migration route will be disrupted. Treaty rights are being infringed and the honour of the crown is being once again besmirched in 2016.
The Site C dam project itself will release greenhouse gases from the decay of vegetation. Never mind that one of the reasons for its' existence is to create electricity for LNG dreams that depend on fracking. Fracking is another disastrous technology that is certainly NOT green, releases greenhouses gases and contaminates wells and water tables with various toxic chemicals.
Some federal permits were issued after the writ was dropped. Although this may not be technically illegal; it certainly is not customary in Canadian parliamentary practice.
Construction is proceeding despite at least three court challenges that have not been decided. That, in itself, is thoroughly immoral if not actually illegal.
Most importantly, this is not a purely local issue that only affects the people that live, work and farm in the immediate area.
Site C is an issue that affects all British Colombians. This project is currently estimated to cost nine billion dollars. It will raise all of our electricity rates and reduce our food security that is already threatened by climate change and by the drought in California.
The worst of it is-we don't need the electricity.
We do need food. We need food, water, conservation of energy, investment in real green technology and to honour our treaties and agreements with First Nations peoples.
I urge the federal government to initiate a pause in providing any new project permits.
The Provincial Government has refused to allow Site C to be reviewed by the BC Utilities Commission. The  need for the energy and the economics of the project must first be fairly and independently examined.  We need a broader look at the overall picture of this disastrous project.
We have an historic opportunity to go down a different path, to create a different road, to heal some of the wounds of our relationship with our First Nations and with the planet that must sustain us all.
I urge the BC Federal Liberal Caucus and the Federal government as a whole to take this historic opportunity.
To allow Site C to continue will make a lie of The Liberal commitment to a new relationship with First Nations and to the commitment to create a new economy that reduces greenhouse gases and our impact on the climate.
Thank you for your time and attention.
Bet Cecill

2016-04-22 23:48:35
AlexisThuillierPentictonBritish Columbia

Site C is not needed for 20 more years at least for power in BC, therefore it is only a political ploy! In the next 20 years we will have discovered numerous alternatives to Hydro power and with continued global warming we are going to need that land for food security. Do not use the excuse that " it's before the courts" as that could take years and the dam would have been built long since, destroying a huge amount of agricultural farm land forever!

Plus the approval by the federal Liberal government will put First Nations relations back decades and guarantee that in BC the Liberal brand will become poison to a great many voters!

2016-04-22 23:51:30
KatherineMaasVictoriaBritish Columbia

I have many concerns about Site C:

1. We don't need this power
2. They are tearing some some of the best farmland in BC to make this dam -- at a time when climate change is threatening food security!
3. First Nations' rights are being ignored. This dam will wreck their ability to use the land. Fishing will be unsafe for a generation! It will also submerge burial grounds and other important cultural and historic sites.
4. Construction has already begun even though the project may not pass final muster. It appears that the BC Liberals are determined to build this dam no matter what. Who has been bribing them, I wonder?
5. One stated purpose for this damn is to provide energy for LNG, but the LNG isn't needed either.
6. We should be investing in non-polluting, renewable energy, like wind, geothermal, and solar-- not in old technology like fossil fuels.
7. Building a dam of this magnitude in earthquake prone territory doesn't seem prudent to me.
8. The dam will further endanger already threatened species.

2016-04-23 00:17:29
DebraYendallChilliwackBritish Columbia

Dear Mark Strahl & Officials;

I lived up in northern B.C. for 20 years. This area is a real gem in B.C. as it has its own extremely unique climate and ecosystem which sustains so much wildlife in the area. For many species of wildlife there will be nowhere else near by where they can really thrive. It is a wildlife corridor, breeding ground and haven during the harsh northern winters.
The leaders of today need to start RIGHT NOW, we need to set these places aside and show future generations how to look after our planet and fellow creatures. Us British Columbians are very well educated and there are so many other possible alternatives for environmentally friendly power sources. I have attended university as an adult, so many youth feel no hope for the future, our planet situation is hopeless and they are making poor living choices to block their inner pain such as drugs. Let us give them hope!
Thank you for listening to the people.
Sincerely,
Debra Yendall
604-795-4444

2016-04-23 00:25:14
EiizabethGodleyVancouverBritish Columbia

This dam is totally unnecessary and should not be built. Please use your powers to stop the madness.

2016-04-23 00:42:55
RayDucholkeStony PlainAlberta

Hi

It is hard for me to imagine that when all the evidence points in the direction that the way we are doing life on planet earth is not sustainable, that another dam like the site c dam has been considered and now approved.

What is wrong with the leaders and governments in their barbaric disregard for Nature and this fragile pale blue dot of Planet Earth?

The tar sands and site C dam are perfect examples of the lack of consciousness and understanding of What It REALLY means to be human.

I no longer believe in punishment or rewards, BUT there are and will be consequences, especially for the decision makers.

Ray

2016-04-23 00:47:24
StevenMetzgerHudson's HopeBritish Columbia

There has never been a full assessment of the need/cost for the Site C Dam. This is not a political issue, as lease it should not be. This is a citizen issue - we, the citizens of BC are going to pay for this for years and years. If the power is needed, then we need to pay for the Site C construction. But if it is not, or is not economically sound at this time, then the project needs to be stopped before we end up paying for something that was a mistake.

We will never know unless there is full review by the BCUC, something the BC Government has made great efforts to prevent.

The Federal Government has the ability to halt this project so that there can be time for this full assessment. Federal permits are necessary for the project to continue, and they can be withheld pending the full assessment.

It is a disservice to the people of BC and Canada to allow this project to proceed without this full assessment.

I urge you to pressure the Liberal Government to take the necessary actions to allow a full assessment of this project to occur.

2016-04-23 00:50:26
StevenMetzgerHudson's HopeBritish Columbia

There has never been a full assessment of the need/cost for the Site C Dam. This is not a political issue, as lease it should not be. This is a citizen issue - we, the citizens of BC are going to pay for this for years and years. If the power is needed, then we need to pay for the Site C construction. But if it is not, or is not economically sound at this time, then the project needs to be stopped before we end up paying for something that was a mistake.

We will never know unless there is full review by the BCUC, something the BC Government has made great efforts to prevent.

The Federal Government has the ability to halt this project so that there can be time for this full assessment. Federal permits are necessary for the project to continue, and they can be withheld pending the full assessment.

It is a disservice to the people of BC and Canada to allow this project to proceed without this full assessment.

I urge you to pressure the Liberal Government to take the necessary actions to allow a full assessment of this project to occur.

2016-04-23 00:51:44
Nachiko & TadYokotaNorth VancouverBritish Columbia

Dear Terry,
It is irritating to read about the maybe yes, maybe not approval of Site C. As a concerned citizen to read about the removal of trees on Site C, while the approval process has not been given, makes a joke
of any regulations that might be available. Even as a lay person I am
aware of the environmental impact if the dam will be built.
It is a well known fact that the Peace Valley is a very important agricultural land reserve and could be vitally important for our future food supply. Our children need this important agriculture land for their climate warming future and not a dam that will create electricity
that we/they don't need.
Please stop making a fool of us citizens who don't approve of the way this case is being tossed around. Listen to us!!
NO SITE C DAM!!

2016-04-23 00:52:22
BradJonesEdmontonAlberta

Dear Linda Duncan and Justin Trudeau:

Federal officials repeatedly state that they can’t comment on Site C because “it’s before the courts.” Don’t let them get away with this non-answer!

The court process could take years to resolve, especially if the federal government continues to fight against the First Nations and the landowners in these cases. Meanwhile construction of the dam continues. BC Premier Christy Clark has even said that her goal is to get the dam to “the point of no return.”

The federal government should thoroughly assess any future permits related to construction of Site C consistent with its commitments to protect the environment and Indigenous rights.

The joint federal-provincial environmental impact assessment concluded that construction of the dam would severely and permanently undermine Indigenous peoples’ use of the land; harm rare plants and other biodiversity; make fishing unsafe for at least a generation; and submerge burial grounds and other crucial cultural and historical sites.

The federal and provincial approvals for the project were given on the basis of the claim that these serious, permanent harms to the environment and Indigenous culture were “justified” by the benefits of the project but they won’t provide us with any details of this ‘justification’ made behind closed doors.

The Joint Review Panel was unsatisfied with the need for and the cost of the project as well as the lack of research into alternatives to Site C. The Chair of the Joint Review Panel, economist, Dr. Harry Swain took the unprecedented step of speaking out on these concerns repeatedly in the media, after the governments decided to proceed with Site C without paying heed to these key recommendations.

Additionally, Dr. Swain stated that if the government wished to proceed with Site C, then these matters of concern should be thoroughly assessed by the independent, arms-length-from-government, British Columbia Utilities Commission. The government’s response to this was to state that these particular matters of concern were actually outside the mandate of the Joint Review Panel! This issue is now before the courts!

Several leading economists from both Canada and the U.S. have determined that better and less expensive alternatives to Site C exist. Robert McCullough stated that BC Hydro used data for comparisons that was up to 5 years out of date. The cost of many renewables has come down significantly in the last year or two. Additionally, alternative projects, including geothermal would provide far more long-term jobs in various locations throughout the province and are less risky as they can be built on an as-needed basis.
BC Hydro has stated in court that the legal implications in respect to the Treaty rights of First Nations were never considered at any point in the decision-making process.

Sincerely,
Brad Jones

2016-04-23 01:00:42
DebraBeretiMissionBritish Columbia

It is insane to flood prime farm land.

2016-04-23 01:09:49
SaraEvansNanaimoBritish Columbia

The valley is home of the Treaty 8 First Nations’ hunting, fishing, and trapping grounds, fertile agricultural lands and farms, old growth boreal forests, and is one of the most important wildlife corridors in the Yellowstone to Yukon migration corridor chain. Bc hydro has even said we don't need it.

2016-04-23 01:15:30
NormWolfeCastlegarBritish Columbia

The court process could take years to resolve, especially if the federal government continues to fight against the First Nations and the landowners in these cases. Meanwhile construction of the dam continues. BC Premier Christy Clark has even said that her goal is to get the dam to “the point of no return.”

The federal government should thoroughly assess any future permits related to construction of Site C consistent with its commitments to protect the environment and Indigenous rights.

2016-04-23 01:27:23
JacquelineSteffenCoquitlamBritish Columbia

My biggest concern about the Site C dam is that is a completely irresponsible move to literally destroy fertile agricultural land when we are facing weather challenges due to climate change. California has already experienced months and months of drought and our province could very well be placed in this same predicament one day in the near future.

Today is April 22, 2016. It's Earth Day and I am calling on our federal government to end this senseless destruction.

The joint federal-provincial environmental impact assessment has concluded that this dam would permanently undermine the Indigenous peoples use of the land, harm biodiversity, destroy important historical sites as well as submerge burial grounds.

BC Hydro has stated in court that the legal implications in respect to the Treaty rights of First Nations were never considered at any point in the decision-making process.

Several leading economists from both Canada and the U.S. have determined that better and less expensive alternatives to Site C exist. Robert McCullough stated that BC Hydro used data for comparisons that was up to 5 years out of date.

The cost of many renewable energy alternative technologies have come down. Alternative projects such as geothermal would provide far more long-term jobs in various locations throughout the province and are less risky as they can be built on an as-needed basis.

After 28 days of hearings and review of 28,000 pages of documentation, the Joint Review Panel concluded that BC Hydro has failed to prove that we need Site C.

I am asking that this project be stopped. There is no justification for this project to proceed. Let's protect our agricultural land for future generations.

Sincerely,

Jacqueline Steffen

2016-04-23 01:52:53
JanyneSinclaireNanaimoBritish Columbia

a) First Nations people have not yet been heard in court, yet a large amount of their heritage lands will be sacrificed.
b) This dam is an outdated method for creating electricity in this day and age, laying waste to a huge amount of prime agricultural land.
c) Given the state of the global climate, all our efforts need to go to sustainable methods of generating power, ones that will not destroy the natural existing function of such a large amount of land.
d) It is not clear that the people whose lives will be upended by this project will see any benefit that would justify throwing them off their lands.
e) As a resident of BC, I believe that the cost/benefit picture for this project (to the people occupying those lands now and to the environment that will be irreparably altered, never mind the amount of public money that will be needed) is not acceptable, especially when there are other means to create electricity.

The federal government has an obligation to ensure that the integrity of Canada's natural environment is protected, first and foremost. Please slow down this juggernaut and ensure completion of a proper assessment.

2016-04-23 02:19:02
claralondonCharlie LakeBritish Columbia

Site C is not needed for British Columbia. The costs are too high. It needs to be reviewed by the BCUC.

Farmland needs protected in the north not flooded.

The Valley is not where a dam should be built because of the sloughing type of soil.

People should not be forced from their homes and land when there is no need for the power.

The wildlife and fish are of great importance and should be protected.

Please save this precious land and its occupants.

Thanks

Clara London

2016-04-23 02:47:50
Andreavon de WallFort St. JohnBritish Columbia

Negative Impact on local agriculture and precious farmland
Lack of any discussion on alternative energy sources
Lack of focus on reducing consumption
Lack of respect towards local First Nation groups and activists

2016-04-23 02:50:03
JoPhillipsSookeBritish Columbia

The Site C dam is not needed according to the Federal Join Review Panel and this conclusion has been ignored by the BC Provincial Government. This is now before the courts. Why is there not an injunction to stop any further work on this project until it is resolved?
The Site C dam project has not received approval from the First Nations people who would be affected by it. How is that possible when the new Liberal government has promised to stop ignoring First Nations' rights?
Other methods of producing electricity such as geothermal are far less costly and destructive and very attainable.

This dam would destroy:
Enough good agricultural land to feed 1 million people
Wildlife habitat and breeding grounds that extend from the U.S. to Alberta.
Fish that would contain toxins from buried habitats for at least a generation.
One of the most beautiful natural areas in Canada

2016-04-23 02:59:28
RonWiltonKelownaBritish Columbia

This dam needs to be assessed properly by the BCUC before continuing and the First Nations concerns before the court dealt with and other court proceedings as well.

I do not believe this project is in the best interests of First Nations, British Columbians or Canadians and if it is allowed to proceed without proper scrutiny will cause great long term harm and civil unrest for very long time.

The current BC government is more like the previous federal Conservative government only more dangerous.

Please give this serious and thoughtful consideration before issuing any more permits allowing them to proceed.

2016-04-23 03:13:47
AnnGrantVancouverBritish Columbia

I am very concerned about the Site C dam. I believe it will destroy critical farmland just when we need this land to grow food. It is also against the wishes of the First Nations and ranchers in the area. It will destroy wildlife in the area.

I don't believe we need the power from the dam. We have other sources of power .

2016-04-23 04:03:39
barbaraillerbrunPowell River British Columbia

My main concern over the Site C dam is the disrespect of the land and those that live there now, including plants and animals. Our provincial government is from a long ago time of BIG projects which put human beings and love of power over other forms of life.
It is time to become aware and wake up,
unlike our BC government and say NO. No to short term jobs, NO
to disregard to First Nations rights and NO the reason for this dam.... LNG which Clark continues to believe is some kind of huge money grab for BC. All of these dirty projects will eventually destroy BC as the Tar sands have destroyed Northern Alta. What has Alta really got now?

It is only a $ grab for her and her friends.
I am SO exhausted of the power of a few unconscious individuals to do so much harm to the land, animals plants and even Yes, human beings that still believe we have domain over other living things.

The point of no return needs to be MS Clark exposed for what is really behind all of this power grab. The point of no return for her and her friends and their aggorant "Harper"like ways. She is so much like Harper and her ignorance of ecology and biology!
The BC government has no real respect for children ( public Education ), the environment, health issues....
she has lost the respect of many , many people and she knows it and so she wants to make this project a point of no return.

Please STOP this Dam and if Climate change really matters to the Federal government than put a hold on it forever! THINK LONG TERM ... BEWARE of Dinosaur thinkers.
Thank you!

2016-04-23 04:08:14
Sada NamKhalsaKasloBritish Columbia

Destroying farm and forest land and disrespecting first nations is not acceptable. Invest in wind and solar instead.

2016-04-23 04:21:09
mlalawindymrBritish Columbia

stop the insanity of destroying this beautiful planet.,., you have the power .,.,stop bowing to corporations that don't care .,., you will be held accountable at some point .,., Nature has her own ways of getting even.,. there are free energy alternatives.,.we don't need new ugly dirty Dams that do great HARM.,.,.,be SMART so your relatives in the future will be proud of you.,., thanks m

2016-04-23 05:01:50
WendyCharCampbell RiverBritish Columbia

we do not need the power generated by Site C but we do need the farmland. Additionally, it seems remarkably arrogant to go ahead with this project when both local First Nations and land owners are against it. BC Hydro is already saddled with crippling debt because of BC Liberal policies. Why are the Liberals throwing more money down this black hole? Please say no to Site C; future generations will thank you for fighting for what is good and right. Thank you.

2016-04-23 05:12:33
NaidaHydeVictoria British Columbia

It's time we started saving these beautiful agricultural lands for our people and First nations peoples to use respectfully. I am sick of governments raping our lands, using valuable water to frack, cutting down trees and toppling eagles' nests. Destruction everywhere. we need the federal government to listen to the citizens of BC who want to preserve the integrity of the Peace Valley.

2016-04-23 05:15:21
PeggyMuirHazeltonBritish Columbia

Although on the surface Site C Dam seems like a greener alternative, it actually has problems of its own:
1. The need for it is in question.
2. Valuable agricultural land will be lost for ever.
3. Indigenous peoples' traditional lands, culture and trapping areas will disappear.
4. The federal government should put a hold on the construction until these matters are mor thotoughly investigated.

2016-04-23 06:35:08
CathyFortinPrince GeorgeBritish Columbia

Dear Mr. Zimmer; I would like to voice my concerns regarding the Site C dam. This damsite is a black eye for British Columbians. In this day and age it is very regressive to think that this is progress. The dam will destroy thousands of acres of good, arable land which is necessary for food security. This is the biggest concern I have and won't bore you with other relevant concerns.

The federal government has the power to stop progress on this travesty by denying the necessary permits to continue construction. You are supposed to represent us, your constituents, in Ottawa and you must realize by now that a majority of your constituents are opposed to the Site C dam. Please add your voice to our opposition and refuse to issue more work permits. There IS a better way.

Yours truly,
Cathy Fortin

2016-04-23 12:37:49
KaijaSprouleDeltaBritish Columbia

We don't need this dam. It will destroy vital areas of the environment and force continued damage with First Nations groups. The provincial government has bypassed legal assessment processes to force an unneeded, unwanted, dangerous dam on its citizens. Please help stop it.

2016-04-23 13:05:40
MaryDancey ClarkeAylmerYukon

My concerns are several, chief among which is this project is totally unnecessary. New innovations should be explored, rather than relying on one ideas. This project, if it continues, will totally disrupt an enormously beautiful and productive area of the province.

There is no real justification for this project. We need to preserve what precious farmland, water supplies and historic sites we have left. This is also the sites of various indigineous burial grounds - sacred ground. Their rights should be respected, as we do our cemeteries.

Please give this matter considerable consideration and support the NO to SITE C people.

2016-04-23 13:59:52
ellainasignorottokimberleyBritish Columbia

Federal officials repeatedly state that they can’t comment on Site C because “it’s before the courts.” Don’t let them get away with this non-answer!

The court process could take years to resolve, especially if the federal government continues to fight against the First Nations and the landowners in these cases. Meanwhile construction of the dam continues. BC Premier Christy Clark has even said that her goal is to get the dam to “the point of no return.”

The federal government should thoroughly assess any future permits related to construction of Site C consistent with its commitments to protect the environment and Indigenous rights.

The joint federal-provincial environmental impact assessment concluded that construction of the dam would severely and permanently undermine Indigenous peoples’ use of the land; harm rare plants and other biodiversity; make fishing unsafe for at least a generation; and submerge burial grounds and other crucial cultural and historical sites.The federal and provincial approvals for the project were given on the basis of the claim that these serious, permanent harms to the environment and Indigenous culture were “justified” by the benefits of the project but they won’t provide us with any details of this ‘justification’ made behind closed doors.

The Joint Review Panel was unsatisfied with the need for and the cost of the project as well as the lack of research into alternatives to Site C. The Chair of the Joint Review Panel, economist, Dr. Harry Swain took the unprecedented step of speaking out on these concerns repeatedly in the media, after the governments decided to proceed with Site C without paying heed to these key recommendations.

Additionally, Dr. Swain stated that if the government wished to proceed with Site C, then these matters of concern should be thoroughly assessed by the independent, arms-length-from-government, British Columbia Utilities Commission. The government’s response to this was to state that these particular matters of concern were actually outside the mandate of the Joint Review Panel! This issue is now before the courts!

Several leading economists from both Canada and the U.S. have determined that better and less expensive alternatives to Site C exist. Robert McCullough stated that BC Hydro used data for comparisons that was up to 5 years out of date. The cost of many renewables has come down significantly in the last year or two. Additionally, alternative projects, including geothermal would provide far more long-term jobs in various locations throughout the province and are less risky as they can be built on an as-needed basis.

BC Hydro has stated in court that the legal implications in respect to the Treaty rights of First Nations were never considered at any point in the decision-making process.

Site C should not take place! We should be looking at low impact alternatives. This land should be preserved in its natural state.

2016-04-23 14:20:41
UrsulaKundRose PrairieBritish Columbia

This Project will destroy precious land and the Peace River valley will be ruined for ever. The costs are to high, the burden will carry on to several generations.There are other options to produce the power that is needed like geothermal energy or some LNG. You could build those projects one at a time on different places when and where the power is needed. Modern technologies will create more jobs for the future than this megaproject.

2016-04-23 15:21:18
UrsulaKundRose PrairieBritish Columbia

This Project will destroy precious land and the Peace River valley will be ruined for ever. The costs are to high, the burden will carry on to several generations.There are other options to produce the power that is needed like geothermal energy or some LNG. You could build those projects one at a time on different places when and where the power is needed. Modern technologies will create more jobs for the future than this megaproject.

2016-04-23 15:21:48
gizellerivwevictoriaBritish Columbia

Federal officials repeatedly state that they can’t comment on Site C because “it’s before the courts.” Don’t let them get away with this non-answer!

The court process could take years to resolve, especially if the federal government continues to fight against the First Nations and the landowners in these cases. Meanwhile construction of the dam continues. BC Premier Christy Clark has even said that her goal is to get the dam to “the point of no return.”

The federal government should thoroughly assess any future permits related to construction of Site C consistent with its commitments to protect the environment and Indigenous rights.

The joint federal-provincial environmental impact assessment concluded that construction of the dam would severely and permanently undermine Indigenous peoples’ use of the land; harm rare plants and other biodiversity; make fishing unsafe for at least a generation; and submerge burial grounds and other crucial cultural and historical sites.

The federal and provincial approvals for the project were given on the basis of the claim that these serious, permanent harms to the environment and Indigenous culture were “justified” by the benefits of the project but they won’t provide us with any details of this ‘justification’ made behind closed doors.

The Joint Review Panel was unsatisfied with the need for and the cost of the project as well as the lack of research into alternatives to Site C. The Chair of the Joint Review Panel, economist, Dr. Harry Swain took the unprecedented step of speaking out on these concerns repeatedly in the media, after the governments decided to proceed with Site C without paying heed to these key recommendations.

Additionally, Dr. Swain stated that if the government wished to proceed with Site C, then these matters of concern should be thoroughly assessed by the independent, arms-length-from-government, British Columbia Utilities Commission. The government’s response to this was to state that these particular matters of concern were actually outside the mandate of the Joint Review Panel! This issue is now before the courts!

Several leading economists from both Canada and the U.S. have determined that better and less expensive alternatives to Site C exist. Robert McCullough stated that BC Hydro used data for comparisons that was up to 5 years out of date. The cost of many renewables has come down significantly in the last year or two. Additionally, alternative projects, including geothermal would provide far more long-term jobs in various locations throughout the province and are less risky as they can be built on an as-needed basis.
BC Hydro has stated in court that the legal implications in respect to the Treaty rights of First Nations were never considered at any point in the decision-making process.

2016-04-23 15:54:46
SheenaPrattTaylorBritish Columbia

Please thouroughly assess any future permits related to construction of Site C and stop these permits, protect the environment and indigenous rights.
The approvals for this project was justified by the benefits of this project. This was done behind closed doors. What are those justifications?
Please review better and less expensive alternatives to Site C.
Please leave a future....

2016-04-23 16:24:38
Ken J.ChambersFort St. JohnBritish Columbia

Christy Clarke went screw you, I don't need any approval, I will do what I want. She has ignored environmental studies , don't need to listen to the Rag Tags protesting (us) Just jamb site c down our throats, just run up the costs so high she cannot quit. no one wants the hydro, the agricultural land don't matter , class 1 , 2, farm land north of Quesnel this land could feed 1 million people. This farm land has been hostage to site c since 1970's I would be very ashamed to be a BCer or Canadian if this dam is not STOPPED
I am ashamed the people of BC are so stupid they don't know they have to pay 8.8-- 20 billion dollars for what hydro she cannot sell
We sent rep's to Ottawa to talk to Trudeau, deaf would not even speak to us. Twice...
trudeau's gov. does not pay any attention to the Law , are you all above the law ? It just gets bent and twisted to how ever the gov wants it, we pay...
It's all crap
Ken J Chambers

2016-04-23 17:02:41
Ken J.ChambersFort St. JohnBritish Columbia

Christy Clarke went screw you, I don't need any approval, I will do what I want. She has ignored environmental studies , don't need to listen to the Rag Tags protesting , Just jamb site c down our throats, just run up the costs so high she cannot quit. no one wants the hydro, the agricultural land don't matter , class 1 , 2, farm land north of Quesnel this land could feed 1 million people. This farm land has been hostage to site c since 1970's I would be very ashamed to be a BCer or Canadian if this dam is not STOPPED
I am ashamed the people of BC are so stupid they don't know they have to pay 8.8-- 20 billion dollars for what hydro she cannot sell
We sent rep's to Ottawa to talk to Trudeau, deaf would not even speak to us. Twice...
trudeau's gov. does not pay any attention to the Law , are you all above the law ? It just gets bent and twisted to how ever the gov wants it, we pay...
It's all crap
Ken J Chambers

2016-04-23 17:08:35
PatriciaNelsonQualicum BeachBritish Columbia

Our young son, as well as the farmers and First Nations, will be paying for this, not us oldsters. Our "Socred" provincial government loves Big Projects is not known for deep thought. Our premier loves photo ops and wants to just get it done before it can be turned back. The Peace River valley is a gift. What is the hurry to destroy it? Personally, our family is making every effort to use less Hydro electricity.

2016-04-23 17:10:17
PatriciaNelsonQualicum BeachBritish Columbia

Our young son, as well as the farmers and First Nations, will be paying for this, not us oldsters. Our "Socred" provincial government loves Big Projects is not known for deep thought. Our premier loves photo ops and wants to just get it done before it can be turned back. The Peace River valley is a gift. What is the hurry to destroy it? Personally, our family is making every effort to use less Hydro electricity.

2016-04-23 17:11:00
NicoleBoonMaple RidgeBritish Columbia

I am deeply concerned about the Site C dam and Christy Clark's comments saying that her goal is to get the dam to “the point of no return.” It frightens me that all this amazing farmland and wild space needed for our province's wildlife is going to be flooded for a massive dam that we don't really need.

The joint federal-provincial environmental impact assessment concluded that construction of the dam would severely and permanently undermine Indigenous peoples’ use of the land; harm rare plants and other biodiversity; make fishing unsafe for at least a generation; and submerge burial grounds and other crucial cultural and historical sites. Is this what your government wants? I hoped that when you came into power that you would be able to stop this destructive dam. How can you justify this permanent abuse to our land and further abuse to indigenous culture?

Several leading economists from both Canada and the U.S. have determined that better and less expensive alternatives to Site C exist. Robert McCullough stated that BC Hydro used data for comparisons that was up to 5 years out of date. The cost of many renewables has come down significantly in the last year or two. Additionally, alternative projects, including geothermal would provide far more long-term jobs in various locations throughout the province and are less risky as they can be built on an as-needed basis.

I truly believe in my heart and soul that the Site C dam is the single most dangerous and destructive project in B.C. and if allowed to go through, it will be the biggest mistake we make this century. It pains me to say that I even think it is worse than the Northern Gateway pipeline, but frankly it is because once we flood this amazing land it is gone forever. Please I beg you don't let this happen…will someone please listen? I am not an environmentalist or a scientist, but even this humble homemaker can see how wrong that this will be!

2016-04-23 17:40:51
NicoleBoonMaple RidgeBritish Columbia

I am deeply concerned about the Site C dam and Christy Clark's comments saying that her goal is to get the dam to “the point of no return.” It frightens me that all this amazing farmland and wild space needed for our province's wildlife is going to be flooded for a massive dam that we don't really need.

The joint federal-provincial environmental impact assessment concluded that construction of the dam would severely and permanently undermine Indigenous peoples’ use of the land; harm rare plants and other biodiversity; make fishing unsafe for at least a generation; and submerge burial grounds and other crucial cultural and historical sites. Is this what your government wants? I hoped that when you came into power that you would be able to stop this destructive dam. How can you justify this permanent abuse to our land and further abuse to indigenous culture?

Several leading economists from both Canada and the U.S. have determined that better and less expensive alternatives to Site C exist. Robert McCullough stated that BC Hydro used data for comparisons that was up to 5 years out of date. The cost of many renewables has come down significantly in the last year or two. Additionally, alternative projects, including geothermal would provide far more long-term jobs in various locations throughout the province and are less risky as they can be built on an as-needed basis.

I truly believe in my heart and soul that the Site C dam is the single most dangerous and destructive project in B.C. and if allowed to go through, it will be the biggest mistake we make this century. It pains me to say that I even think it is worse than the Northern Gateway pipeline, but frankly it is because once we flood this amazing land it is gone forever. Please I beg you don't let this happen…will someone please listen? I am not an environmentalist or a scientist, but even this humble homemaker can see how wrong that this will be!

2016-04-23 17:40:54
BrentHowardVictoriaBritish Columbia

It is so extensive and pervading is this the best we can do. I think not.. What about retrofitting all the home that need better weather proofing I bet there would then be 100 times the energy in savings back! Think about conservation than growth growth growth all the time. We don't want to become a cancer to beautiful mother earth. We need to adapt to moderating our energy and definitely our harm to the planet this is your and my home and what about our grandkids then there kids etc we need to plan better and be better stewarts of this land like the natives want us to also. We need governments that are rational not like our "BC Leader" Crusty Clark who is insane and totally on the lng train.. I am honestly so distressed with her she seems totally insane to me.. BC needs Elizabeth May as premier as she is thoughtful smart and realistic and one hell of a good listener which is totally what Canadians need politicians who listen instead of talk all the time. Politicians who can hear our voices say stop look and listen and have our thoughts when you make decisions.. thank you..

2016-04-23 17:44:19
BarbaraDyllaMontrealQuebec

The federal government should thoroughly assess any future permits related to construction of Site C consistent with its commitments to protect the environment, as well as Canadians' and Indigenous peoples' rights.

The joint federal-provincial environmental impact assessment concluded that construction of the dam would severely and permanently undermine Indigenous peoples’ use of the land; harm rare plants and other biodiversity; make fishing unsafe for at least a generation; and submerge burial grounds and other crucial cultural and historical sites.

As well, Peace Valley’s “extraordinary” farmland could feed a million people, according to agrologists in a Site C Dam review. Over 8,300 acres are class 1 and 2 soils – making it some the best farmland in the country! At a time when food scarcity and sustainable food production are becoming increasingly important because of the adverse impact of global warming (floods, droughts, disappearing family farms), preserving Canada's farmland, land and waterways is crucial.

Lastly, it is a known fact that mega-dams are more destructive than productive. If anything, Canada must support, encourage and find ways to use energy (water, solar, wind) more efficiently and effectively. The recently signed UN Climate Agreement depends on this.

I hope the comments submitted will be read and considered.

Very truly yours,

2016-04-23 18:40:30
CampbellHOBSONPowell RiverBritish Columbia

I have grave concerns about the abbreviated approval process employed to give BC Hydro permission to start construction without adequate justification.
The Peace River is a vital part of the ecological environment, not only for fish and wildlife, first nations, but critical productive farmland.
It is essential to step back and consider alternatives to the dam, with its massive initial carbon footprint.

2016-04-23 19:29:37
NorineWarkDawson CreekBritish Columbia

Dear MP Bob Zimmer:

It is my understanding that as a member of the Federal Conservative party, you fully support the destruction of our planet in the pursuit of short-term economic and political gain for a few over the rights and responsibilities of many. Nevertheless, as the recent victory and current overhaul by our new Federal Liberal party indicates, a new Era is dawning. It is an Era in which our planet comes first.

It has come to my attention that the BC Premier is PUBLICALLY and CONFIDENDENTLY bragging that no government, no court, NO ONE can stop her political party from pushing Site C forward. Yet at the same time she is openly shopping for anyone to buy the electricity from this dam. The most recent news has her attempting to bargain with the Alberta Premier to use Site C power to "electrify" the Tar Sands, a technological innovation that she admits has yet to be realized.

The utter lunacy, deception, and irrationality that the BC Liberals and the lobbyists pushing for Site C have demonstrated, and continue to demostrate is astounding. They count on the fact that this colossal fiasco is destroying a vast area of northern BC in the hope that southern British Columbians will remain naive and gullible. However, the populous is stirring, not only in BC and Canada, but across our globe. More and more people are realizing that it is our collective right and responsibility to take care of our home planet. We must, if we are to survive.

Countless informed individuals are writing to Federal Ministers and our valient, visionary Canadian leader, Honourable Justin Trudeau, outlining numerous SIGNIFICANT environmental and human impacts we will all suffer needlessly if one short-term provincial cabinet bullies the ill-conceived Site C through. I will not be-labour these concerns here, as I have frequently outlined them in the past to you, other political leaders, the Site C consultation team, academic scholars and students, social groups, various media entities, and the general public.

Rather, I will simply state the obvious: the price is too high. Please act prudently and justly. Actively support the people's call for an independent review by the BC Utilities Commission.

Sincerely,

Norine Wark

2016-04-23 20:08:07
BernadetteKeenanSurreyBritish Columbia

Federal officials repeatedly state that they can’t comment on Site C because “it’s before the courts.” Don’t let them get away with this non-answer!

The court process could take years to resolve, especially if the federal government continues to fight against the First Nations and the landowners in these cases. Meanwhile construction of the dam continues. BC Premier Christy Clark has even said that her goal is to get the dam to “the point of no return.”

The federal government should thoroughly assess any future permits related to construction of Site C consistent with its commitments to protect the environment and Indigenous rights.

The joint federal-provincial environmental impact assessment concluded that construction of the dam would severely and permanently undermine Indigenous peoples’ use of the land; harm rare plants and other biodiversity; make fishing unsafe for at least a generation; and submerge burial grounds and other crucial cultural and historical sites.

The federal and provincial approvals for the project were given on the basis of the claim that these serious, permanent harms to the environment and Indigenous culture were “justified” by the benefits of the project but they won’t provide us with any details of this ‘justification’ made behind closed doors.

The Joint Review Panel was unsatisfied with the need for and the cost of the project as well as the lack of research into alternatives to Site C. The Chair of the Joint Review Panel, economist, Dr. Harry Swain took the unprecedented step of speaking out on these concerns repeatedly in the media, after the governments decided to proceed with Site C without paying heed to these key recommendations.

Additionally, Dr. Swain stated that if the government wished to proceed with Site C, then these matters of concern should be thoroughly assessed by the independent, arms-length-from-government, British Columbia Utilities Commission. The government’s response to this was to state that these particular matters of concern were actually outside the mandate of the Joint Review Panel! This issue is now before the courts!

Several leading economists from both Canada and the U.S. have determined that better and less expensive alternatives to Site C exist. Robert McCullough stated that BC Hydro used data for comparisons that was up to 5 years out of date. The cost of many renewables has come down significantly in the last year or two. Additionally, alternative projects, including geothermal would provide far more long-term jobs in various locations throughout the province and are less risky as they can be built on an as-needed basis.
BC Hydro has stated in court that the legal implications in respect to the Treaty rights of First Nations were never considered at any point in the decision-making process.

2016-04-23 21:41:26
SandraGunnFort St JohnBritish Columbia

Loss of farm land
Loss of river levels
Concern with erosion of banks
Rising mercury levels in river
Loss of beautiful vistas
The Northeast once again trades it's health, farmland and resources for the benefit of large cities and corrupt government
Concerns with change in weather patterns
Concerned with a short-sighted plan

2016-04-23 23:03:36
SandraGunnFort St JohnBritish Columbia

Loss of farm land
Loss of river levels
Concern with erosion of banks
Rising mercury levels in river
Loss of beautiful vistas
The Northeast once again trades it's health, farmland and resources for the benefit of large cities and corrupt government
Concerns with change in weather patterns
Concerned with a short-sighted plan

2016-04-23 23:04:07
RobertaOlenickVancouverBritish Columbia

I urge the federal government to reject permits necessary for construction of the Site C dam on the Peace River in British Columbia.

Court challenges to the dam could take years to resolve while in the meantime, dam construction continues. It is just wrong to allow construction to continue to the point of no return before the courts have reached a verdict on whether the dam should proceed at all.

The joint federal-provincial impact assessment concluded that the dam would severely and permanently undermine First Nations' use of their land, harm rare plants and other biodiversity, make fishing unsafe for at least a generation and submerge sensitive cultural and historic sites. Such impacts run counter to the Liberal government's claims that it will respect First Nations' concerns and the environment. Justification for allowing such impacts have not been revealed to the public. BC Hydro has stated in court that the legal implications of First Nations' Treaty rights were never considered at all in the decision-making process.

The Joint Review Panel was not convinced that the dam is needed, that the cost of it justified and that adequate research into alternatives such as geothermal was not conducted yet the government has proceeded without addressing the panel's concerns and recommendations. These matters should be fully assessed by the independent BC Utilities Commission before dam construction proceeds any further.

What all this tells me is that the approval process for this project is seriously flawed, that construction is already impacting First Nations and the environment even as related cases are still before the courts and that the time is now for the federal government to step in and reject or put on hold federal permits required for the dam until the project undergoes more thorough and appropriate scrutiny.

Too much is at stake in the Peace: impacts on First Nations, loss of critical habitat for wildlife, loss of biodiversity, flooding of crucial farmland that will become increasing necessary for food security as climate change advances. Alternative energy supplies that do not have these devastating impacts need to be researched and considered before any further Site C construction is allowed.

2016-04-23 23:22:27
CrystalSpicerEdgewoodBritish Columbia

1. Site C would result in the destruction of very valuable agricultural land that would feed a million people in perpetuity.

2. An unfair process was carried out that did not allow the BC Utilities Commission to take part.

3. The hearings were held up north in January making it difficult for many interested parties to attend.

3. Costs and alternatives were not sufficiently researched.

4. Construction is proceeding while Site C is before the courts.

5. There is a glut of hydro power in BC and export prices are extremely low.

6. There are better alternatives for energy production. BC is blessed with geothermal, tidal, wind, and solar opportunities.

2016-04-24 02:17:17
weskmetKelownaBritish Columbia

Hello MP Dan Albas and Prime Minister and fellow MP's----I have followed this issue very closely and there are so many/many extremely important aspects of this project that will be a curse on our lovely planet and particularly that area of B.C. but everything is connected so it goes far beyond in its ramifications. Everything from the one million people that this valley can potentially feed to the very regressive way of getting more power for our province and elsewhere which is also very questionable in the need for getting more power. This playing cosy with Corporations that generally all our politicians do is so sad and so bad for our planet and every living thing and non living thing on earth. Can we not be progressive in how we live and do business as what do we really need to live a full life and our aboriginals knew how to do it and we so called civilized folks are choking our planet. So pleaseplease stop this project. If everyone in B.C. knew alot of the details of this project it would be stopped immediately. So stop it for all our sake. Please reply to my concerns.

2016-04-24 11:10:35
CliffWallisCalgaryAlberta

This isssue is before the courts but there are decisions that could be made to make this process fair and stop destruction of the beautiful Peace River valley.

It is my view that the federal government should assess any permits they need to issue for this project in a manner consistent with its stated commitments to protect the environment and Indigenous rights.

The joint federal-provincial environmental impact assessment concluded that construction of the dam would severely and permanently undermine Indigenous peoples’ use of the land; harm rare plants and other biodiversity; make fishing unsafe for at least a generation; and submerge burial grounds and other crucial cultural and historical sites.

BC Hydro has stated in court that the legal implications in respect to the Treaty rights of First Nations were never considered at any point in the decision-making process.

Please ensure that the federal permitting process is strictly adhered to for this project.

2016-04-24 11:42:53
sandraleckiesalt spring islandBritish Columbia

Allowing this 8.8 billion (costs rising) megaproject to go ahead will cripple Canada's long term food security.
This project does not have consent of First Nations people or the consent of British Columbians.
Site C will devastate wildland habitat for thousands of species some of which are "protected" under Canada's already weakened Species at Risk Act.
Site C is a climate change disaster. Christy Clark has said it will be used to power fracked gas plants or the tar sands extraction. We run our household on solar energy and are net producers of electricity. Site C completely undermines our efforts to "green" BC Hydro.

2016-04-24 16:47:43
sandraleckiesalt spring islandBritish Columbia

Allowing this 8.8 billion (costs rising) megaproject to go ahead will cripple Canada's long term food security.
This project does not have consent of First Nations people or the consent of British Columbians.
Site C will devastate wildland habitat for thousands of species some of which are "protected" under Canada's already weakened Species at Risk Act.
Site C is a climate change disaster. Christy Clark has said it will be used to power fracked gas plants or the tar sands extraction. We run our household on solar energy and are net producers of electricity. Site C completely undermines our efforts to "green" BC Hydro.

2016-04-24 16:48:13
cynthiamcneilagassisBritish Columbia

If the government rejects or puts these permits on hold, it would buy time for important legal challenges by First Nations and local landowners to be addressed.

Despite public commitments to respect the rights of Indigenous peoples and ensure transparent and accountable environmental assessment process, Prime Minister Trudeau and his Cabinet have refused to address the many concerns about Site C.

As a BC resident I fail to see why your party wants us, our children and their children's children to pay for something we do not want or need. We must look at alternatives to the destruction of our environment, waterways, animal habitat, and lively hood and homes.

Site C Dam must be stopped.

2016-04-24 17:04:38
wendy mcleanSavonaBritish Columbia

Dear Cathy McLeod

I have multiple concerns about this project moving forward. I do not believe that the need for it has been adequately justified, especially in the light of renewable energy sources that can be built at lesser expense and without as significant financial and environmental costs. This project should not proceed any further until the needs, costs, alternatives and land claims issues have been fully assessed.

It is my belief and the belief of many others, including relevant professionals and scientists, that the value of these lands for food, biodiversity and cultural values far outweighs the energy it can produce at their loss. The comparative cost of distributed solar, geothermal and wind power generation in lieu of this large hydro project have not been considered. While the rest of the developed world actively moves away from large hydro projects for financial and environmental reasons, BC is moving backward, trying to re-create an old legacy whose time is gone, for reasons that do not fit with the direction that Canada has now made an international commitment to move towards. Like the LNG projects in the region that it was hoped to power, this large hydro project has no place in the economy of the future that Canada has committed to in Paris and cannot be found to make economic sense with current or estimated energy prices.

At the very least, please stop all preparatory construction until the issues of the legality and economic justification of this project have been settled.

2016-04-24 20:15:44
SandraSpenceFort St. JohnBritish Columbia

Besides all the havoc this dam will create, it has been proven that there is no need for it.

Our fairly new, elected Prime Minister stated that he will work with the Aboriginal people of Canada on Reconciliation. By allowing this dam to be built, there isn't much in the way of Reconciliation happening.

As the Peace River valley stands right now, it can produce food for more than a million people. It doesn't make sense that we have food being transported in when we have the ability to raise it here.

2016-04-24 20:45:35
NicolaPerrinWilliams LakeBritish Columbia

I am very concerned about the Site C dam and vehemently opposed to Site C. I believe it will destroy critical farmland just when we need this land to grow food. It is also against the wishes of the First Nations and ranchers in the area. It is short sighted and unconscionable to proceed.
Please, DO NOT issue permits for the building of Site C Dam.
Thank you.

2016-04-24 22:55:08
louisebourassavictoriaBritish Columbia

the joint provincial and federal environmental impact assessment concluded that construction of the dam will severely and permanently undermine Indigenous people's use of the land; harm rare plants and other biodiversity; make fishing unsafe for at least a generation; and submerge burial grounds and other crucial cultural and historical sites.

Many scientists have said that there are better alternative than Site C ; we are trying to go forward and create clean an efficient energy for the future. Alternative like solar panels, geothermal would create far more jobs that the Site C dam and are more in line with the necessity to protect the planet.

The Federal government has the power to deny the permits and halt construction, therefore protect the land and its inhabitants.

Thank you,

2016-04-24 23:38:50
StevenRowatRoberts CreekBritish Columbia

Dear Ms. Goldsmith-Jones,

The site C dam is a mega-project looking for a reason to exist. And that reason has disappeared. Please do not let our society, and the world, fall prey to the momentum of ideas from the past that are no longer valid.

We now know that the climate can only be controlled if we shift to the new model of small-scale power production, using fully renewable and non-carbon-producing sources.

We also know that the tar sands must not be developed.

We also know that the power that would be produced by site C is no longer projected to be needed.

We also know that traditional peoples affected are against it.

We also know that full, world-scale, environmental assessments have not been compleltely or competentely carried out.

Please help oppose this disastrous undertaking. Or at very least, hold your government to their promises, so that a fair, objective, arm's length, fully world-scale environmental assessment is carried out starting now.

Thank you

Steven Rowat

2016-04-25 00:36:50
Denise GardinerMoberly Lake British Columbia

Dear Minister, Members of the Cabinet and Members of Parliament,

Federal Officials repeatedly state that they can't comment on site C because "it's before the courts". This is such a cop-out and an evasive action not to make a decision. The court process could take years to resolve, especially if the federal government continues to fight against the First Nations and the landowners in these cases. BC Hydro has to obtain permits related to continued construction of the dam from the Ministry of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard, as well as from the Ministry of Transport. THEY HAVE THE POWER TO DENY THESE PERMITS AND HALT CONSTRUCTION, which in turn would allow for a thorough assessment of the project by the BC Utilities Commission and would also allow time for the outstanding court cases by First Nations and landowners to be heard and decided upon.
In this new millennium, dams are archaic, costly, destructive and provide a poor return on the money spent. Site C was planned in the fifties. The BC Utilities Commission has denied it's construction twice already because it was not needed, too costly and destructive and better alternatives were available. These reasons are still valid today. That is why the Provincial government by-passed this Review. This government speaks a lot of uplifting and moving words. The promises are beautiful only if they are followed by action and not apathy. Thank you for your time.
Denise Gardiner

2016-04-25 02:48:42
RobbyWrightFort St JohnBritish Columbia

I am concerned about the agricultural land lost through flooding as well as the cost of the project. I also would question what the intended use of energy generated would be for, as rumours and news indicate it will be used to produce fossil fuels.

I would also like to see the data which supports this project as a 'clean' source of energy, as the cumulative greenhouse gas figures for the deforestation, flooding and construction must be immense

The public voice of your constituents has also indicated that this project is not well received and due process has not been followed. I am disillusioned that this project is being pushed through despite the number of objections from land users, aboriginal groups, environmental organizations and local residents.

I believe more transparency is needed in the decision making process though I have been alarmed at your silence in supporting the voice of your constituents in objecting to this project. I would have hoped that you would have made a public stand on this topic as opposed to the silence that seems apparent given my inability to find any sounds bits or statements you have made.

2016-04-25 07:13:10
ElizabethPsyllakisVictoriaBritish Columbia

There are many reasons to be concerned about the construction of the site C damn on the Peace River. This construction will be against the wishes of Treaty 8 Nations whose land will be flooded as a result.
The land to be flooded is valuable farmland
Many species, some of which are at risk, will be displaced or lost.
There are cases to be heard before the Courts. Construction should not continue until those cases have been completed. It took no time for the Courts to issue an injunction to remove protestors in order to begin clearcutting the land The same consideration should be given the cases already before the Courts
BCHydro is carrying a massive deficit. The price tag for site C is estimated at 8.8 billion dollars. This is more realistically going to be 12billion or more. This is a tremendous debt for the people of BC to carry for years into the future for something we don't want, don't need, can't afford, and plan to give away upon completion.
The construction of site C represents the tip of an iceberg symbolic of too many things that are wrong with the political process in British Columbia. Please give every consideration to the research and the opinions available.

2016-04-25 07:24:42
ElizabethPsyllakisVictoriaBritish Columbia

There are many reasons to be concerned about the construction of the site C damn on the Peace River. This construction will be against the wishes of Treaty 8 Nations whose land will be flooded as a result.
The land to be flooded is valuable farmland
Many species, some of which are at risk, will be displaced or lost.
There are cases to be heard before the Courts. Construction should not continue until those cases have been completed. It took no time for the Courts to issue an injunction to remove protestors in order to begin clearcutting the land The same consideration should be given the cases already before the Courts
BCHydro is carrying a massive deficit. The price tag for site C is estimated at 8.8 billion dollars. This is more realistically going to be 12billion or more. This is a tremendous debt for the people of BC to carry for years into the future for something we don't want, don't need, can't afford, and plan to give away upon completion.
The construction of site C represents the tip of an iceberg symbolic of too many things that are wrong with the political process in British Columbia. Please give every consideration to the research and the opinions available.

2016-04-25 07:24:42
KimCrawfordLondonOntario

To allow this project to proceed is not in the best interest of Canada, temporary construction jobs are not worth the destruction of the Peace River Valley. Hydro power is not 'clean' energy. This project goes against the Liberal Party policy of clean energy, care for the environment and dealing with First Nations people as equals. We continue to steal land from the First Nations, and I am not happy with this fact.
I voted Liberal for positive change and to get rid of government that ignores what is morally right.

2016-04-25 08:33:20
LavernJensenStony PlainAlberta

Dear Rona Ambrose;
MP in Parkland County,

Re: Site C Proposed Dam

Please do what you can to stop this dam from going ahead. So many precious animals and all forms of wildlife will be destroyed and put out of their beautiful habitat. In addition this absolutely beautiful valley and all of the flora and fauna will be needlessly obliterated and there will never be another Peace River Valley like it.

Quotation from Real Site C Hearings Organization:
"BC Hydro has to obtain permits related to continued construction of the dam from the Ministry of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard, as well as from the Ministry of Transport. They have the power to deny these permits and halt construction, which in turn would allow for a thorough assessment of the project by the BC Utilities Commission and would also allow time for the outstanding court cases by First Nations and landowners to be heard and decided upon.

Dr. Harry Swain, former Chair of the Joint Review Panel on Site C, with a doctorate in economics, has made the unprecedented move of publicly stating that the need for, cost and alternatives to this project were not sufficiently researched and that the dam should not proceed until these matters are fully assessed and justified. Numerous other experts have done their research and stated the same.

It's time our government paid attention - before any more destruction in the Peace River Valley takes place! Unquote"

Please save this Valley for our future generations to enjoy!

Yours truly,
Lavern Jensen

2016-04-25 14:33:35
SusanStoutNorth VancouverBritish Columbia

1. First Nations are opposed!
2. It means the destruction of valuable farmland (they've already clearcut the forest!)
3. BC doesn't need the power!

2016-04-25 15:33:07
ClaraShandlerNew Westminster British Columbia

His is a historic and archeological site that should be PROTECTED not destroyed. We must adapt energy saving measures rather than fuel an increase in demand in order to create a sustainable economic system.

2016-04-25 20:11:55
KateEllisonVancouverBritish Columbia

Dear Ms. Kwan,

I am deeply concerned about the on-going construction of Site C Dam. The government has the power to halt construction and deny the necessary permits, and I urge you to raise your voice for that to happen.

The joint federal-provincial assessment concluded that the dam would harm the people of Treaty 8's ability to exercise their treaty rights to land usage, such as their burial grounds and cultural and historical sites. It would also impact their ability to exercise their right to hunting and fishing.

Moreover, it would destroy valuable agricultural land that is only going to become more important in the face of global warming. People have raised concerns about the escalating price of healthy food - leaving the Peace River Valley to the farmers would be a way to counter this troubling trend.

The joint review panel, moreover, expressed skepticism as to whether the need for Site C Dam justified the cost. Moreover, they recommended that the British Columbia Utilities Commission exercise their role and assess these issues. Unfortunately, the provincial government has denied them the chance to do that.

My friend Kristin Henry recently went on a 20-day hunger strike to stand in solidarity with the people of the Peace River Valley - First Nations and settler alike - who are fighting the dam in the courts. This process, however, could take years before it is completed. "We can't comment as the matter is before the courts" is therefore not an answer.

Please stand up for the Peace River Valley.

2016-04-26 02:09:47
PeterKerrKelownaBritish Columbia

I am very concerned that construction permits have been issued for a dam at Site C on the Peace River. These permits should be withdrawn immediately. The promise made by the federal government to build a renewed nation-to-nation relationship with indigenous peoples is being violated in that Treaty 8 First Nations have not provided consent to the Site C dam. The dam would flood their heritage sites. The B.C. Utilities Commission has been bypassed. The Agricultural Land Commission was not consulted.

The Peace River Valley has the potential to feed at least one million people yet this dam would flood all that land in order to provide power that is not needed and the power would most likely go towards fracking operations to provide liquefied natural gas (LNG) when the market for LNG is very weak and getting weaker.

There are other reasons this is such a terrible plan including the blocking of the Yellowstone to Yukon wildlife corridor for big mammals.

The Ministry of Fisheries, Oceans, the Canadian Coast Guard and the Ministry of Transport have the power to withdraw construction permits and they should do so as soon as possible.

The Joint Review Panel that investigated this project was not satisfied with the need for the project, with the huge cost- particularly as the power is not needed, and with the lack of research into alternatives to the Site C dam.

I urge you to call for withdrawal of construction permits for this dam so a thorough assessment of the project by the B.C. Utilities Commission can take place and so that outstanding court cases by First Nations and land owners in the area can be decided.

Thank you.

2016-04-26 02:52:31
HelenRaySecheltBritish Columbia

I am very concerned about the potential loss of so much of our best farmland. With Climate Change upon us, we will need all available farmland to feed our people. The destruction of this farmland would be criminal.

Proper reviews have not been done.

Please put a permanent halt to this project.

How will we explain this to our children and grand children?

Thank you for signing the Paris agreement.

Sincerely,
Helen Ray

2016-04-26 16:58:13
BarryMonaghanV ancouverBritish Columbia

Not only is this a blatant violation of native people's rights, but his project is an unnecessary white elephant meant to supply a fractured gas industry that is not going to happen (Clarke's fantasy!)

We need this land to grow the food that feeds a million people per year and the money for public transit which would create thousands of jobs as this silly person in Victoria likes to keep saying.

If this silly white elephant is built then the entire so called reconciliation with native people is a complete fraud!

This is the moment of truth Trudue.

I think you are a complete fraud.

Want to prove me wrong?

Cancel this stupid project once an for all!

2016-04-26 20:17:39
CaroleTootillnanaimoBritish Columbia

Absolutely irresponsible to ignore real science and rubber stamp an improper environmental assessment, and for what? Energy British Columbians don't need, oh, but LNG and other extraction projects do. We know the BS and we are sick of it. Food security should be paramount, and killing lush land should never happen, especially as there is so little left. As for respecting First Nations desire to protect their land, this government once again mocks anything resembling responsible environmental stewardship and fair negotiation with First Nations. But the government will pretend to listen... as usual...

2016-04-27 05:45:02
WendyJonesVancouverBritish Columbia

Dear Honourable Jenny,

Site C Damn is probably one of the worst electrical power sources next to the Alberta Tar Sands and Fracking.

It's unworthy.

Site C will flood a valley that is invaluable as farmland and sacred sites of First Nations, as well as indispensable for wildlife, the plant and tree world and the oxygen all plant life provides us with.

I all beyond anger, I am crying.

Federal level politicians say they can't talk about Site C because it's before the courts...that is not an answer. It a bogus claim and needs the strength and power and boldness of opposition to speak up!!!

We need politicians to intervene against Premier Christy Clark and PM Justin Trudeau. I believe you to have that braveness, Jenny.
I believe in you.

Thank you for serving me and I hope you like Ottawa!

Wendy Jones (Shane Simpson's sister-in-law)

2016-04-27 16:32:54
MikeLewisDeltaBritish Columbia

You cannot ruin this land! for the sake of what? Money? Future generations will not be able to restore what your government proposes to do. Oh yeah you are suppose to be my government, start acting like it!

2016-04-27 22:38:11
MikeLewisDeltaBritish Columbia

You cannot ruin this land! for the sake of what? Money? Future generations will not be able to restore what your government proposes to do. Oh yeah you are suppose to be my government, start acting like it!

2016-04-27 22:38:17
MikeLewisDeltaBritish Columbia

You cannot ruin this land! for the sake of what? Money? Future generations will not be able to restore what your government proposes to do. Oh yeah you are suppose to be my government, start acting like it!

2016-04-27 22:38:24
GeraldPilonChristina LakeBritish Columbia

is the provincial liberal party ramrodding the site c project to the point of no return, before the legal challenges have run their course?
The joint review panel stated many concerns of the detrimental environmental issues that are being ignored. This is a fertile lowlying area that could be a valuable contributor to a sustainable food basket in BC,especially in the light of global warming. speaking of which, where is the water that is to fill this dam? in glaciers that will be gone in 25 years, right?

2016-04-28 14:19:35
DonKeillorpowell riverBritish Columbia

the epitome of political waste.

2016-04-29 00:52:25
JulieWordenVancouverBritish Columbia

The site c dam is and will continue to create extensive localized ecological damage to one of the most productive and beautiful places on earth. The dam also creates hazard for the caribou in the region which are already at risk. Not to mention that it is infringing on the rights of the nations that have occupied this land for thousands of years.

As a concerned Canadian I ask you, Please do not issue construction permits until a thorough assessment can be made.

2016-04-30 16:29:18
Donna SinclairNorth BayOntario

The Site C dam project may seem far away. It is in British Columbia. However, is important to us in the rest of Canada. If one province is allowed to simply carry on an expensive and destructive project -- without the federal government exercising its power to review the environmental and social problems involved -- other provinces will do the same.

I love British Columbia. I love it because it is ( as its tourism ads pronounce) beautiful. I love it because it is part of Canada. I love it because my daughter and grandson live there.

I want to see it cared for and productive. The Site C dam would flood a prime agricultural area, an area important to First Nations, and contaminate a huge amount of fresh water with mercury.

We are past the days when this is an option. Please speak out against this foolish and ultimately catastrophic dam.

2016-05-02 18:48:20
marckaisernorth vanBritish Columbia

Dear Mr Wilkinson,

I am writing to you again to express my profoundest opposition to the ongoing construction of the Site C dam. This project is very harmful. Are you aware that this dam will end up flooding an area equivalent to the distance between North Vancouver and Chilliwack? In the process,excellent farmland will be flooded, animal habitat destroyed, native rights trampled on (I guess this is the nature of Canadian white settler society. Nothing has changed in over 100 years of our history). As my representative, I ask you to speak out against this extremely destructive and unnecessary project.

Yours truly,
Marc Kaiser
(written from North Van City Library)

2016-05-02 19:12:35
marckaisernorth vanBritish Columbia

Dear Mr Wilkinson,

I am writing to you again to express my profoundest opposition to the ongoing construction of the Site C dam. This project is very harmful. Are you aware that this dam will end up flooding an area equivalent to the distance between North Vancouver and Chilliwack? In the process,excellent farmland will be flooded, animal habitat destroyed, native rights trampled on (I guess this is the nature of Canadian white settler society. Nothing has changed in over 100 years of our history). As my representative, I ask you to speak out against this extremely destructive and unnecessary project.

Yours truly,
Marc Kaiser
(written from North Van City Library)

2016-05-02 19:13:15
JaniceWilsonNorth VancouverBritish Columbia

Dear Jonathan Wilkinson:

With over 30 NGOs opposed to the Site C dam being forced on us by the BC Liberals, I am sure I don't need to go over the many serious objections to this project.

I am writing to you because the federal government will soon make decisions on permits necessary for continued construction of the Site C dam.

If the government rejects or puts these permits on hold, it would buy time for important legal challenges by First Nations and local landowners to be addressed.

I implore you to deny these permits and halt construction so that full disclosure by the BC Utilities Commission and proper assessment of outstanding issues with First Nations, landowners and environmentalists can be decided.

Sincerely,
Janice Wilson
North Vancouver

2016-05-02 20:47:27
OliverHockenhullVancouverBritish Columbia

Food security is way more important than the ridiculous premise of drowning one of the most valuable agricultural valleys in BC...Solar and Ocean power is the way to go...NOT the old technology of WAC Bennetts' BC. Christy Clark is incredibly corrupt and an idiot.

2016-05-03 00:06:54
KateChungTorontoOntario

Why do we again and again have to fight for justice for indigenous people and for the environment.

Do the politicians and industrialists really think they and their grandchildren can eat dams and drink oil?

2016-05-03 01:55:53
Rob Janssen Coquitlam British Columbia

The Site C dam should never be allowed to be built. With the flooding of prime farm land, the excuse that the dam could power the Alberta oil sands processes (this carbon should remain in the ground anyway), and just the sheer waste of money (costs continue to rise)... this project should never be allowed to happen.

2016-05-03 02:56:57
JanHalvarsonVancouverBritish Columbia

Site C decreases agricultural land that can feed a million people as global population increases. Where is our food going to come from?

2016-05-03 03:40:18
TenneilleMetzDawson CreekBritish Columbia

1.Destroying food producing land for a dam that will last only 1 generation is not for the benefit of the masses.

2. First Nations were not consulted.

3. Disregard for landowners

4. Spending tax payers dollars to get this project to a point of no return is criminal.

5. The peace River valley should be a protected and preserved region for northern people. It is our breadbasket.

2016-05-03 03:56:35
PatO'RileyNorth VancouverBritish Columbia

I have two major concerns:

a) Firstlly, building Site C dam is in violation of the rights of the Indigenous Peoples whose traditional lands will be flooded.

b) Secondly, building Site C dam will be an environmental disaster for a large section of British Columbia.

My husband and I encouraged many of our friends and neighbours to vote for you in the October federal election because we felt that you respected the rights of Indigeous Peoples as articulated in the UN Declaration nof the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the Canadian Charter on the rights of Indigenous Peoples, and that you understand the environmental crisis humanity is now facing.

We respectfully ask that you work with the Prime Minister, your colleagues in Ottawa, and the BC Government to stop the building of the Site C dam.

Thank you!

2016-05-03 04:51:58
TamaraHenryMeadow CreekBritish Columbia

The federal government has the power to deny these permits and halt construction. Furthermore they have an obligation to halt construction to allow First Nations and other affected landowners to make their case.

The Site C project will be devastating to biodiversity and the environment as a whole. The impact on the fish alone will be huge.

It is critical that you deny the permits and halt construction now.

Sincerely,
Tamara Henry

2016-05-03 04:55:41
JaniceWilliamsGibsonsBritish Columbia

Please deny the permits and stop construction!

2016-05-03 05:08:37
KarenSwordEtobicokeOntario

There are multiple reasons why we must not proceed with the Site C Dam.

First and foremost, we do not need the energy from it, in the long run. Within the next 50 years, we are going to need that arable farmland a lot more than we are going to need the energy that Site C will produce.

Secondly, the indigenous people who live there do not want it and their rights are being trampled by process.

Thirdly, this matter was decided on the basis on insufficient discussion of the merits of the project and is being rammed through process without regard for either point above.

This project needs to be stopped now. Not later. Not when 'due process' has already wrecked the land for other uses.

2016-05-03 10:45:10
AndrewJenssonMontrealQuebec

Dear Dr Garneau,

I am writing to you today to bring attention to the situation on the other side of the country which is of critical import; energy! I know that you appreciate the sciences and are no stranger to innovation and research; we may also agree on the nature of energy and the ability to efficiently generate an abundance of it using the blessings that our great country has granted to us.

I am an Electrical Engineer, graduated from Lakehead University in 2007 and I am taking a break from industry while currently pursuing my Masters of Applied Science in Electrical Engineering with in the renewable and alternative energy fields.

Why I am reaching out to you today is that I have performed my own calculations and estimations and seen that not only is the "Site C" project grossly underestimated for cost, it's necessity is also highly questionable. Not to mention the huge environmental and social implications it's construction will entail. I would greatly appreciate a discussion with you at you convenience and we can exchange our ideas, understandings and even propose alternate solutions.

At this time, I believe that we are under a similar understanding regarding this project and similar energy-related projects and I request that you make your voice heard in no unclear terms that as Canadians, we are responsible for our use of resources especially when alternates are available.

Thank you kindly,
Sincerely

Andrew Jensson, P.Eng.

2016-05-03 19:49:04
RogerBryentonVancouverBritish Columbia

It is NOT needed! We do not need electricity! Conservation, less waste, can provide and equal amount of power. Columbia Treaty can provide the same amount of power. Burrard thermal can provide the few hours of peaking necessary. We do no have to flood the Peace Valley farmland, destroy First Nations culture, create environmental havoc! STOP SITE C!!!

2016-05-04 16:42:39
janetGerenShasta LakeCalifornia

Another dam, NO, another holocaust for the animals and the decimation of sacred lands. This must NOT go forward, this must not happen.

Our futures children will never see the gift that is here if this continues.

Janet Geren

2016-05-05 18:13:39
RandalHadlandDawson CreekBritish Columbia

Dear Mr. Zimmer,

Up until your election as our MP we had a representative who knew that Site C is a really bad idea. It is a really bad idea for a variety of reasons. I would like to hear your opinion on this destructive, expensive, unnecessary project.

The Treaty between Canada and First Nations covering this area needs to be respected and honoured. The first nations people living in this area have rights that are protected by that treaty. Rights to land, right to pursue their own lives and cultures, rights to sustainability. We the citizens of Canada have taken and we have not returned. This part of the valley is very important from a spiritual point of view as well.

The agricultural values, recreational opportunities, fish and game and wild food, the historic presence, and habitability are all very important to all of us.

The proposed dam has been maneuvered into a construction destruction position by the Provincial Crown Corporation and the Provincial Government and your former Conservative federal cabinet. It has been denied a full and open hearing into aspects such as Treaty 8 rights, the value of the farmland, the need for a dam at this time, the alternatives to a dam, and even the cost of a dam. These aren't questions that are going to go away.

The Peace River and the people of the Peace need to hear from you about this. What are your thoughts?

Randal Hadland

2016-05-05 20:11:57
urselKrzykowskinanaimoBritish Columbia

This land doesn't belong to us to destroy. Thus is the home of farmers, father's mothers children along with thousands of animals. You cannot allow this project to go through. The hydro isn't needed and to speculate about fracking use, this cannot be done in our earthquake zone. Stop destroying this province. It's hard enough to fight mother nature and climate change let alone more human destruction of our beautiful province. STOP SITE C NOW!!!!!

2016-05-05 20:42:57
RogerHarrisSurreyBritish Columbia

There are many reasons why this dam should not be built and they have been well publicised but destroying a river valley for power we do not need is just wrong. This is the 21st century, not the 1950's!

2016-05-05 21:04:55
KathyKuenzlTomslake British Columbia

Dear Mr. Zimmer,

Up until your election as our MP we had a representative who knew that Site C is a really bad idea. It is a really bad idea for a variety of reasons. I would like to hear your opinion on this destructive, expensive, unnecessary project.

The Treaty between Canada and First Nations covering this area needs to be respected and honoured. The first nations people living in this area have rights that are protected by that treaty. Rights to land, right to pursue their own lives and cultures, rights to sustainability. We the citizens of Canada have taken and we have not returned. This part of the valley is very important from a spiritual point of view as well.

The agricultural values, recreational opportunities, fish and game and wild food, the historic presence, and habitability are all very important to all of us.

The proposed dam has been maneuvered into a construction destruction position by the Provincial Crown Corporation and the Provincial Government and your former Conservative federal cabinet. It has been denied a full and open hearing into aspects such as Treaty 8 rights, the value of the farmland, the need for a dam at this time, the alternatives to a dam, and even the cost of a dam. These aren't questions that are going to go away.

The Peace River and the people of the Peace need to hear from you about this. What are your thoughts?

2016-05-06 00:01:54
ElizabethPsyllakisVictoriaBritish Columbia

I have great concern about the construction of the site C damn on the Peace River.
Firstly I would say that, for the people of British Columbia, this project is an extra ordinary expense.
This construction infringes upon the rights of First Nation people and their treaty with the Government. A Government that has promised to uphold Truth and Reconciliation.
Land has been removed from the ALR. Thousands of acres of land that will be needed for future farming in this Province.
There are cases before the Courts that need to be heard before the Government of BC can or should proceed.
The construction done to date includes clear cutting and dredging. Both of these actions go against environmental practices.

We need a halt to this project which, as more and more people become aware, is not wanted. We feel we are not being heard and are powerless. We believe there is a great need to approach our energy needs from a different perspective.

Please do everything in your power as our representative to call a halt to the construction of the site C damn.

Sincerely;

Elizabeth Psyllakis

2016-05-06 00:52:18
ElizabethPsyllakisVictoriaBritish Columbia

I have great concern about the construction of the site C damn on the Peace River.
Firstly I would say that, for the people of British Columbia, this project is an extra ordinary expense.
This construction infringes upon the rights of First Nation people and their treaty with the Government. A Government that has promised to uphold Truth and Reconciliation.
Land has been removed from the ALR. Thousands of acres of land that will be needed for future farming in this Province.
There are cases before the Courts that need to be heard before the Government of BC can or should proceed.
The construction done to date includes clear cutting and dredging. Both of these actions go against environmental practices.

We need a halt to this project which, as more and more people become aware, is not wanted. We feel we are not being heard and are powerless. We believe there is a great need to approach our energy needs from a different perspective.

Please do everything in your power as our representative to call a halt to the construction of the site C damn.

Sincerely;

Elizabeth Psyllakis

2016-05-06 00:52:28
elaineangelskivictoriaBritish Columbia

The cost of loosing valuable farm land and the cost of building a dam for the use of things like fracking,and greenhouses in a northerly climate when there are other alternatives for electricity..
Please put a halt to the construction , a moratorium or what ever it takes..

2016-05-06 01:02:10
BrianGilbeyLower NicolaBritish Columbia

Dan Albas,
I am urging you to do everything in your power to stop this stupidity and to issue no more permits for the site C dam. BC needs the farm land more than we need to give our power and resources away to a bunch of corrupt corporations. This is what the majority of people in BC want. If you don't you will be booted out in the next federal election, at least I hope!

2016-05-06 02:57:00
WendyTaylorBurnabyBritish Columbia

BC Hydro has to obtain permits related to continued construction of the dam from the Ministry of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard, as well as from the Ministry of Transport. They have the power to deny these permits and halt construction, which in turn would allow for a thorough assessment of the project by the BC Utilities Commission and would also allow time for the outstanding court cases by First Nations and landowners to be heard and decided upon.

The joint federal-provincial environmental impact assessment concluded that construction of the dam would severely and permanently undermine Indigenous peoples’ use of the land; harm rare plants and other biodiversity; make fishing unsafe for at least a generation; and submerge burial grounds and other crucial cultural and historical sites.

The federal and provincial approvals for the project were given on the basis of the claim that these serious, permanent harms to the environment and Indigenous culture were “justified” by the benefits of the project but they won’t provide us with any details of this ‘justification’ made behind closed doors.

“The Peace River Valley can provide fruits and vegetables for over a million people per year. Forty-four percent of the foods that can be economically grown in BC are still being imported! Fruits and vegetables are the most deficient categories of those food sources. The Peace River valley is capable of producing a variety of crops comparable to BC’s fertile Fraser Valley. As world prices for food escalate, the land BC Hydro plans to flood for Site C is our food security Plan B. Site C dam may have a 100-year life, but the agricultural land in the Peace Valley will support life in perpetuity.” – Economic agrologist Wendy Holm. BC

The Joint Review Panel was unsatisfied with the need for and the cost of the project as well as the lack of research into alternatives to Site C. The Chair of the Joint Review Panel, economist, Dr. Harry Swain took the unprecedented step of speaking out on these concerns repeatedly in the media, after the governments decided to proceed with Site C without paying heed to these key recommendations.

Additionally, Dr. Swain stated that if the government wished to proceed with Site C, then these matters of concern should be thoroughly assessed by the independent, arms-length-from-government, British Columbia Utilities Commission. The government’s response to this was to state that these particular matters of concern were actually outside the mandate of the Joint Review Panel! This issue is now before the courts!

Several leading economists from both Canada and the U.S. have determined that better and less expensive alternatives to Site C exist. Robert McCullough stated that BC Hydro used data for comparisons that was up to 5 years out of date. The cost of many renewables has come down significantly in the last year or two. Additionally, alternative projects, including geothermal would provide far more long-term jobs in various locations throughout the province and are less risky as they can be built on an as-needed basis.
BC Hydro has stated in court that the legal implications in respect to the Treaty rights of First Nations were never considered at any point in the decision-making process.

2016-05-06 03:28:48
NatalieLucasSouth SlocanBritish Columbia

Everything about it screams STOP THIS DEVASTATION!!! The province is unethical ly ignoring so much opposition for what? We can proceed with getting energy through geothermal, solar, wind and still protect the salmon', the farms and first nations rights to their traditional territory.

2016-05-06 05:38:40
Dianavan EykNelsonBritish Columbia

Dear Mr. Stetski,

Please do all you can to deny permits and halt construction of the Site C Dam.

The construction of the dam would severely and permanently undermine indigenous peoples' use of the land, submerge burial grounds and destroy this fertile region that could grow so much food.

I look forward to your reply.

Sincerely,

Diana van Eyk
Nelson, BC

2016-05-07 16:31:18
LynnChapmanRoberts CreekBritish Columbia

The EA Process was inadequate to the task of determining the full costs of #SiteC and its findings of fact were ignored by both governments which approved this Environmental Disaster.
We do not need this project to supply energy and the lost opportunity of transitioning now to a truly green energy economy is an unbearable cost to our and future generations.
Failure to identify and investigate alternatives to this project in an open independent manner demands that the Federal Government has a responsibility to stop this project at least until such an assessment is completed.
The Liberal election promises regarding environmental protection, respect for Treaties and creating a respectful nation to nation relationship with First Nations and restoring transparent and trustworthy public processes must be fulfilled in relation to #SiteC. Empty rhetoric about the court cases will not suffice.
DO THE RIGHT THING AND HALT SITE C CONSTRUCTION UNTIL PROPER, INDEPENDENT ASSESMENTS AND OUTSTANDING COURT CASES ARE COMPLETED.

2016-05-08 02:24:52
JackSteinGibsonsBritish Columbia

I am hoping that my vote was not wasted in voting for the Liberal Government. I am expecting huge changes to be made in our country visa vie our treatment to first nations and the destruction of our land by clear cut logging. As a first step, please stop this madness that is site C dam and start listening to the natives who's land this is. I would expect the Government at least to immediately stop anymore continued building of the dam until all the court cases by First Nations are heard, all the Ministries have been given the appropriate consents to continue. I am appalled at the BC provincial government once again confiscating land that rightfully belongs to the natives.

2016-05-08 06:25:47
DaleSankeyRoberts CreekBritish Columbia

This project has not been thoroughly researched as to the future needs for food in BC . With droughts on California and increasing food costs this fertile land could be used to feed millions of future generations.where is the accountability for costs and the future of our grandchildren? You have the ability to stop this now!

2016-05-09 04:39:17
WayneSavardNelson British Columbia

Please consider halting site C Dam, as it it is overly expensive, could easily be replaced by solar and wind power, and robs us of badly needed agricultural land. Our futur food supply is being threatened by global droughts and Canada"s dependence on California and Mexico for much of our produce puts us in great jeopardy as the effects of climate change continue to worsen. If the goal of the Site C dam is to supply energy for the expansion of the carbon energy, this would make it a highly immoral project as it contravenes all common sense and all dictates of Natural Law.

Concerned,
Wayne Ron Savard

2016-05-09 13:37:32
JohnMcNamerKamloopsBritish Columbia

Dear Prime Minister Trudeau:
I request that you act immediately to reverse all federal permitting which allows work on the Site C Dam in British Columbia to go forward, or at the very least put into place a moratorium on construction until legal actions by local First Nations have been fully resolved in the courts. In support of this, I cite the facts in the excellent article below as presented by the chiefs of the two First Nations which will be irreparably damaged by Site C.
This dam is not coming from a place of necessity, but from a place of political grandiosity and greed on the part of the British Columbia government. There is clearly no justification for ignoring the treaty rights of local First Nations, nor for the rape of the earth that is about to occur. It is high time for the abusers to learn that "no means no."
I am a non-Native rancher in the B.C. southern interior and it is my belief that Site C is a clear statement from the provincial and federal government that the centuries-old racist colonial power structure is firmly entrenched, and willing and able to recklessly continue abusive exploitation at the point of a gun as it might wish. I predict Site C will go down in history as a shining symbol of hypocrisy about "truth and reconciliation" in Canada for all the world to see, and that it will be harmful to all Canadians, Native and non-Native alike.
(editor's note: this letter was copied to Premier Christy Clark, Kamloops MLAs Lake and Stone, and relevant federal and provincial ministers)
John McNamer, Kamloops [email protected]
http://vancouversun.com/opinion/opinion-site-c-is-an-environmental-and-economic-disaster

2016-05-09 20:13:21
JanineBandcroftvictoriaBritish Columbia

We need to grow food for human animals to eat directly. The Peace Valley could easily grow enough beans, corn, potatoes, fruit, etc, for many many human animals.

Why is the government spending so much of our money to destroy more of BC's precious wilderness, including the natural water systems, for this ridiculous unnecessary Site C Dam project? Let the wild be wild, leave the rivers alone. Tell Nestle and Coca Cola NO, you can't have access to our water for the purposes of privatization. Tell Christie Clark NO, we don't want to destroy this province for your ridiculous fracking plans.

Please respect the court processes that are initiated by First Nations and landowners from the region to protect this valley. To ignore all of the voices against this dam is an affront to democracy.

2016-05-10 14:11:55
JonLeBaronDenman IslandBritish Columbia

Dear mp Gord Johns
Please give serious attention to what is happening at the BC Hydrro Site C dam project and note it is totally within the power and mandate of the Federal Govt. to stop this outrageously expensive destruction of First Nations sacred homeland and the homes and farms and communities of many other peoples just to build another hydro-electric dam which we do not need! It is cear that BC Hydro also has strong vested interests in getting control of the water in this river so as to profit from selling the water to United States in vast quantity! Huge damage has already been done by BC Hydro environmentally and they are ignoring the rights of the First Nations court hearings on the site C issues that have not yet been fully heard in the Courts! They have also shown no respect for basic human rights of protest and demonstration! The Federal Govt. needs to show some leadership and shut this BAD project down NOW! Stop caving in to big corporate greed and power OVER everything and everyone!!!
Thank you, Jon LeBaron

2016-05-10 23:34:32
DIANEKASTELWHEATONIllinois

Federal officials repeatedly state that they can’t comment on Site C because “it’s before the courts.” Don’t let them get away with this non-answer!

The court process could take years to resolve, especially if the federal government continues to fight against the First Nations and the landowners in these cases. Meanwhile construction of the dam continues. BC Premier Christy Clark has even said that her goal is to get the dam to “the point of no return.”

BC Hydro has to obtain permits related to continued construction of the dam from the Ministry of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard, as well as from the Ministry of Transport. They have the power to deny these permits and halt construction, which in turn would allow for a thorough assessment of the project by the BC Utilities Commission and would also allow time for the outstanding court cases by First Nations and landowners to be heard and decided upon.

The joint federal-provincial environmental impact assessment concluded that construction of the dam would severely and permanently undermine Indigenous peoples’ use of the land; harm rare plants and other biodiversity; make fishing unsafe for at least a generation; and submerge burial grounds and other crucial cultural and historical sites.

The federal and provincial approvals for the project were given on the basis of the claim that these serious, permanent harms to the environment and Indigenous culture were “justified” by the benefits of the project but they won’t provide us with any details of this ‘justification’ made behind closed doors.

“The Peace River Valley can provide fruits and vegetables for over a million people per year. Forty-four percent of the foods that can be economically grown in BC are still being imported! Fruits and vegetables are the most deficient categories of those food sources. The Peace River valley is capable of producing a variety of crops comparable to BC’s fertile Fraser Valley. As world prices for food escalate, the land BC Hydro plans to flood for Site C is our food security Plan B. Site C dam may have a 100-year life, but the agricultural land in the Peace Valley will support life in perpetuity.” – Economic agrologist Wendy Holm. BC

The Joint Review Panel was unsatisfied with the need for and the cost of the project as well as the lack of research into alternatives to Site C. The Chair of the Joint Review Panel, economist, Dr. Harry Swain took the unprecedented step of speaking out on these concerns repeatedly in the media, after the governments decided to proceed with Site C without paying heed to these key recommendations.

Additionally, Dr. Swain stated that if the government wished to proceed with Site C, then these matters of concern should be thoroughly assessed by the independent, arms-length-from-government, British Columbia Utilities Commission. The government’s response to this was to state that these particular matters of concern were actually outside the mandate of the Joint Review Panel! This issue is now before the courts!

Several leading economists from both Canada and the U.S. have determined that better and less expensive alternatives to Site C exist. Robert McCullough stated that BC Hydro used data for comparisons that was up to 5 years out of date. The cost of many renewables has come down significantly in the last year or two. Additionally, alternative projects, including geothermal would provide far more long-term jobs in various locations throughout the province and are less risky as they can be built on an as-needed basis.
BC Hydro has stated in court that the legal implications in respect to the Treaty rights of First Nations were never considered at any point in the decision-making process.

2016-05-12 14:49:50
LindaHeidtCAnmoreAlberta

To Those Decision Makers and Goverment Representatives:

The joint federal-provincial environmental impact assessment concluded that construction of the dam would severely and permanently undermine Indigenous peoples’ use of the land; harm rare plants and other biodiversity; make fishing unsafe for at least a generation; and submerge burial grounds and other crucial cultural and historical sites.

The Peace River Valley can provide fruits and vegetables for over a million people per year. Forty-four percent of the foods that can be economically grown in BC are still being imported! Fruits and vegetables are the most deficient categories of those food sources. The Peace River valley is capable of producing a variety of crops comparable to BC’s fertile Fraser Valley. As world prices for food escalate, the land BC Hydro plans to flood for Site C is our food security Plan B. Site C dam may have a 100-year life, but the agricultural land in the Peace Valley will support life in perpetuity.” – Economic agrologist Wendy Holm. BC

The Joint Review Panel was unsatisfied

Several leading economists from both Canada and the U.S. have determined that better and less expensive alternatives to Site C exist. Robert McCullough stated that BC Hydro used data for comparisons that was up to 5 years out of date. The cost of many renewables has come down significantly in the last year or two. Additionally, alternative projects, including geothermal would provide far more long-term jobs in various locations throughout the province and are less risky as they can be built on an as-needed basis.
BC Hydro has stated in court that the legal implications in respect to the Treaty rights of First Nations were never considered at any point in the decision-making process.

Please consider carefully the impacts of this proposal, and the future of this area, for all Canadians.

2016-05-12 14:51:15
RodNelsonCalgaryAlberta

I realize you are in opposition, and may no longer have influence but this started under your admin. and needs to stop.
Thanks
Rod nelson

2016-05-12 14:54:32
AmandaJekumsTorontoOntario

Dear Julie Dzerowicz,

Continued food security and the rich bio diversity provided by the Peace Valley region are under great threat from the proposed Site C Dam. If you haven't already, please take a moment to look at the devastating effects that have already happened from this project: http://thetyee.ca/News/2015/12/17/Peace-Valley-Construction/

The Liberal commitment to renewed relationships with First Nations' necessitates swift action to halt this development. Please reject the Site C Dam and focus on renewable energy sources that don't compromise human and environmental well being.

Thank you for your time,
Amanda Jekums

2016-05-12 15:03:41
pathorrockslethgridgeAlberta

Stop the site C dam

2016-05-12 15:17:40
peterthompsonkelownaBritish Columbia

we don't need site c to produce electricity. there are many other ways to get electricity. even using natural gas which is abundant in the region is preferable to destroying this land forever.
once flooded this beautiful land is gone forever. use wind or natural gas to produce the electricity.

too much land lost. too many animals murdered (drowned).

we must realiize by now that more land destroyed increases the severity of climate change.

lets get this one right and use other means that will not destroy the precious land.

peter thompson

2016-05-12 15:35:43
KathyHeislerPort MoodyBritish Columbia

Stop Site C - invest in solar and wind!

2016-05-12 15:58:44
WendyKrahnWest KelownaBritish Columbia

Dear Mr. Albas -
The word "damaging" begins with "dam".
In the US, they have dammed every major river and they are in a water crisis.
We do not need more hydro electric power when we live in a time when there are so many other options available.
More importantly though, for decades we have been destroying arable land that could and should be used for growing our own food.
As a person living in the Okanagan, I am dismayed that so many food retailers still import so much food from south of the border even though we grow it right here! This is destroying our small grower's as they can't compete with the cheap prices.
As the climate changes shift warmer weather northwards this land will become even more important to our food security.
Furthermore, as a Canadian living alongside, and friends with, first nations people, I want to respect their heritage and territorial rights. Not to mention the rights of all the people who will be displaced by this project. This is NOT a project for the greater good but one that will line the pockets of the all ready wealthy. It's time we all stood up to do the right thing instead of the greedy thing and I sincerely hope that you will make a stand to defend this land against corporate greed.
I know people are fearful and think that we NEED this but we don't.
I hope you will have the courage and the foresight to aid in stopping this project.
Than you for your time.
Wendy Krahn
West Kelowna

2016-05-12 16:11:23
LoriAlderPouce CoupeBritish Columbia

This is an unneeded source of power. There are many earth friendly sources of electrical power and dams are a thing of the past! Please stop BC Hydro and our Liberal govt from killing our birds and wildlife with another dam on the Peace River. Thank you Lori Alder

2016-05-12 16:30:40
CherylApplewhaiteEDMONTONAlberta

This represents an inability of the present government to plan for the future of our offspring and of the earth.

We do not need additional oil based resources. The dangers of fracking are not fully understood and currently there is an excess of oil on the world markets.

Resources should be directed to alternative energy sources AND the better management of what we have currently.

This project also shows littlE respect to our native peoples YET AGAIN

2016-05-12 17:19:17
GeorgiaBraithwaiteCottonwoodArizona

The joint federal-provincial environmental impact assessment concluded that construction of the dam would severely and permanently undermine Indigenous peoples’ use of the land; harm rare plants and other biodiversity; make fishing unsafe for at least a generation; and submerge burial grounds and other crucial cultural and historical sites.
“The Peace River Valley can provide fruits and vegetables for over a million people per year. Forty-four percent of the foods that can be economically grown in BC are still being imported! Fruits and vegetables are the most deficient categories of those food sources. The Peace River valley is capable of producing a variety of crops comparable to BC’s fertile Fraser Valley. As world prices for food escalate, the land BC Hydro plans to flood for Site C is our food security Plan B. Site C dam may have a 100-year life, but the agricultural land in the Peace Valley will support life in perpetuity.” – Economic agrologist Wendy Holm. BC

The Joint Review Panel was unsatisfied with the need for and the cost of the project as well as the lack of research into alternatives to Site C. The Chair of the Joint Review Panel, economist, Dr. Harry Swain took the unprecedented step of speaking out on these concerns repeatedly in the media, after the governments decided to proceed with Site C without paying heed to these key recommendations.

2016-05-12 17:19:21
Vivien JeanBroughtonWinnipegManitoba

We cannot afford to destroy so much habitat and farmland. We could be reducing our demand for electricity and non-renewable energy.

2016-05-12 17:46:59
KellyLoewenPrince GeorgeBritish Columbia

If you can't comment on this case as it's "before the courts" then how can BC Hydro begin construction on the project, if it's still "before the courts"? If the project is still being decided, then BC Hydro should wait to start construction until the courts have resolved the issues.

However, Site C should be scrapped, it's clearly not in the best interests of BC Taxpayers and is only there to line the pockets of the natural gas companies owners.

If the government continues to show it has no backbone it just proves it's in the pocket of those companies as well and will need to be removed from office next election.

2016-05-12 18:00:49
KellyLoewenPrince GeorgeBritish Columbia

If you can't comment on this case as it's "before the courts" then how can BC Hydro begin construction on the project, if it's still "before the courts"? If the project is still being decided, then BC Hydro should wait to start construction until the courts have resolved the issues.

However, Site C should be scrapped, it's clearly not in the best interests of BC Taxpayers and is only there to line the pockets of the natural gas companies owners.

If the government continues to show it has no backbone it just proves it's in the pocket of those companies as well and will need to be removed from office next election.

2016-05-12 18:01:41
KarolyBan MateiLacombeAlberta

Wildlife habitat is more important than a dam, and the loss and interruption of it propagates rifle effects to additional habitats and species.

2016-05-12 18:05:11
tomgrayvictoriaBritish Columbia

The electricity that will be produced is not needed. In the past excess electricity was sent to USA private companies to sell to their customers and BC never received any payment for that electricity.

2016-05-12 20:05:09
malcolmwilsonRenfrewOntario

This is one thing you could be against that would be a help.

2016-05-12 20:55:38
ERICBOUCHERQUEEN CHARLOTTE VILLAGEBritish Columbia

Dear Nathan,

In the coming weeks the federal government will make decisions on permits necessary for continued construction of the Site C dam.

If the government rejects or puts these permits on hold, it would buy time for important legal challenges by First Nations and local landowners to be addressed.

Despite public commitments to respect the rights of Indigenous peoples and ensure transparent and accountable environmental assessment process, Prime Minister Trudeau and his Cabinet have refused to address the many concerns about Site C.

The Prime Minister and his Cabinet need to hear from Members of Parliament in ridings across Canada that their constituents care about the Site C and want the federal government to take action!

You can make a difference by sending a letter to your MP through this site and we encourage you to follow up by phoning your MP and talking to them; better yet, meeting with them in person to make sure they are listening!

After entering your address information, your letter will go directly to the MP representing your riding. We will also share your letters with Prime Minister Trudeau and key federal ministers.

The court process could take years to resolve, especially if the federal government continues to fight against the First Nations and the landowners in these cases. Meanwhile construction of the dam continues. BC Premier Christy Clark has even said that her goal is to get the dam to “the point of no return.”

BC Hydro has to obtain permits related to continued construction of the dam from the Ministry of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard, as well as from the Ministry of Transport. They have the power to deny these permits and halt construction, which in turn would allow for a thorough assessment of the project by the BC Utilities Commission and would also allow time for the outstanding court cases by First Nations and landowners to be heard and decided upon.

The joint federal-provincial environmental impact assessment concluded that construction of the dam would severely and permanently undermine Indigenous peoples’ use of the land; harm rare plants and other biodiversity; make fishing unsafe for at least a generation; and submerge burial grounds and other crucial cultural and historical sites.

The federal and provincial approvals for the project were given on the basis of the claim that these serious, permanent harms to the environment and Indigenous culture were “justified” by the benefits of the project but they won’t provide us with any details of this ‘justification’ made behind closed doors.

“The Peace River Valley can provide fruits and vegetables for over a million people per year. Forty-four percent of the foods that can be economically grown in BC are still being imported! Fruits and vegetables are the most deficient categories of those food sources. The Peace River valley is capable of producing a variety of crops comparable to BC’s fertile Fraser Valley. As world prices for food escalate, the land BC Hydro plans to flood for Site C is our food security Plan B. Site C dam may have a 100-year life, but the agricultural land in the Peace Valley will support life in perpetuity.” – Economic agrologist Wendy Holm. BC

The Joint Review Panel was unsatisfied with the need for and the cost of the project as well as the lack of research into alternatives to Site C. The Chair of the Joint Review Panel, economist, Dr. Harry Swain took the unprecedented step of speaking out on these concerns repeatedly in the media, after the governments decided to proceed with Site C without paying heed to these key recommendations.

Additionally, Dr. Swain stated that if the government wished to proceed with Site C, then these matters of concern should be thoroughly assessed by the independent, arms-length-from-government, British Columbia Utilities Commission. The government’s response to this was to state that these particular matters of concern were actually outside the mandate of the Joint Review Panel! This issue is now before the courts!

Several leading economists from both Canada and the U.S. have determined that better and less expensive alternatives to Site C exist. Robert McCullough stated that BC Hydro used data for comparisons that was up to 5 years out of date. The cost of many renewables has come down significantly in the last year or two. Additionally, alternative projects, including geothermal would provide far more long-term jobs in various locations throughout the province and are less risky as they can be built on an as-needed basis.
BC Hydro has stated in court that the legal implications in respect to the Treaty rights of First Nations were never considered at any point in the decision-making process.

Thanks for your time and considerations concerning this issues that threatens our food security as well as proper procedures, in acting in good faith, in relation to consultations with our First Nations throughout the country.

Sincerely,
Éric Boucher.

2016-05-12 22:08:52
MDellaVedovaSault Ste. MarieOntario

I am asking that the government stop issuing permits for the Site C dam in British Columbia.
Time is needed for a detailed and thorough assessment of the project by the BC Utilities commission. Time is needed for the resolution of outstanding court cases between First Nations and landowners. In spite of this I understand that dam construction is underway. I believe that it should be halted until the above issues are resolved.
We have already heard from the joint federal-provincial environmental impact assessment that concluded that the construction of this dam would have catastrophic consequences for the Indigenous people's use of the land, for the biodiversity of the region, for fishing, and for burial grounds and cultural and historical sites which would in fact be submerged. I cannot understand how such permanent and serious harm to the environment and indigenous culture can be justified. Canadians have not been advised as to how our government can justify the cost of the project and the harm it would cause. Nor have we heard of any government mandated research into alternatives to Site C. We do know that several leading economists have determined that better and less expensive alternatives do exist. For instance, geothermal projects across the province would provide more long term employment and would be less risky.
Even though the matter of Site C is before the courts, it may take years to resolve. In the meantime the construction of Site C should be halted. I ask that the government deny construction permits and halt construction of this project.

2016-05-12 22:20:14
Michel Boucher BeresfordNew Brunswick

It is high time that common sense starts to prevail if we want to save the little there is left of the healthy part of our world. We have to lead by example and learn to say no to destruction where life is concerned and not join thise that have already sold their souls to where regret is eternal.
Geothermal, wind, solar, and the sea and not forgetting the many engine types that use no fuel that actually exist than could easy be made big enough to power large power turbines for practically nothing. The oceans have about 40 and we are continuing to serve the wrong side of common sense. Please listen to your conscience and help this country of ours and make us proud again. Thank you

2016-05-12 22:22:15
TeriDaweSecheltBritish Columbia

Stop the work now.

2016-05-13 00:14:01
JohnBergenskeskookumchuckBritish Columbia

I am extremely concerned about continued work on the Site C dam. This project is contrary to environmental and social sustainability---- a giant mistake that should never have been allowed to get underway. Please do all in your power to put a stop to the project now before further destruction of the Peace River ecosystem and communities takes place!

2016-05-13 00:35:39
SeanDemersWashingtonMichigan

Preserve this please!

2016-05-13 00:58:27
HaroldNeufeldtVancouverBritish Columbia

Why build Site C dam?
Alternative energy, solar and wind, more cost effective.
Agricultural land will be flooded
Fisheries will be impacted adversely.
First Nations reserve would be flooded without consent.
AND I as a tax payer will be paying for a dam we don't need.
So STOP the dam, put the permits on hold, until the courts address the legal challenges before the court.

2016-05-13 01:54:17
JaneWeltonVictoriaBritish Columbia

Please speak up for the denial of all permits that would allow any progress towards the building of the Site C dam. It is the wrong thing to do for many many reasons (eg. destroying valuable agricultural land, eg. destroying traditional territories and trampling yet again on indigenous rights eg. we don't even need the power it will generate) and I am quite hopeful that in the end the courts will rule against it. But I am deeply concerned that, if permits are allowed, then before the courts deny the dam, huge environmental damage will already have been done with no benefits whatsoever accruing.

2016-05-13 02:11:18
BradJonesEdmontonAlberta

It is so bad for the ecosystem and environment , therefore not truly Green Energy!

2016-05-13 06:07:22
stevencapemontrealQuebec

Short and sweet. Your government should stop issuing permits to do construction on the Site C dam. To save your reading time I won't list the 4 zillion reasons why this is the only thing that makes any sense. Yyou know the issues. Do the right thing -- give your loved ones a reason to be proud of you.

Thanks Forever,
Steven Cape

2016-05-13 12:26:15
susanhubersalt speing islandBritish Columbia

it is totally unneccessary, no need for the water and no need to flood all the areas where no animals can cross not humans can grow wheat. it is criminal this day and age to have yet another dam.....!

2016-05-13 14:55:58
susanhubersalt speing islandBritish Columbia

it is totally unneccessary, no need for the water and no need to flood all the areas where no animals can cross not humans can grow wheat. it is criminal this day and age to have yet another dam.....!

2016-05-13 14:56:19
RobertKleiOsoyoosBritish Columbia

Dear Richard,

You are much an environmentalist as myself, if not more so. Therefore I hardly need to ask you to fight against the issuance of any permits for the proposed Site C Dam.

I am confident you will do your utmost best. I just wanted my voice to be added to those who strongly oppose this needless and destructive project.

Sincerely,
Robert Klei

2016-05-13 15:05:27
Laurene Brown Edmonton Alberta

Linda Duncan, please do all you can to get the Liberal government to stop giving construction permits for the Site C Dam in B C.

Please do all you can do and then more!

Sincerely,

Laurena Brown

2016-05-13 15:05:57
KasiaRicher-JuraszekMontrealQuebec

Please stop issuing permits for Site C dam!!!!

“The Peace River Valley can provide fruits and vegetables for over a million people per year. Forty-four percent of the foods that can be economically grown in BC are still being imported! Fruits and vegetables are the most deficient categories of those food sources. The Peace River valley is capable of producing a variety of crops comparable to BC’s fertile Fraser Valley. As world prices for food escalate, the land BC Hydro plans to flood for Site C is our food security Plan B. Site C dam may have a 100-year life, but the agricultural land in the Peace Valley will support life in perpetuity.” – Economic agrologist Wendy Holm. BC

The construction of the dam would severely and permanently undermine Indigenous peoples’ use of the land; harm rare plants and other biodiversity; make fishing unsafe for at least a generation; and submerge burial grounds and other crucial cultural and historical sites.
BC Hydro has stated in court that the legal implications in respect to the Treaty rights of First Nations were never considered at any point in the decision-making process.

2016-05-13 15:10:02
EsteePaliToronto, ONOntario

Please help Canadians preserve the environment for generations to come.

Let's focus on alternatives and new technologies wherever possible.

Do not allow the issuing of permits for the Site C dam on Treaty 8 territory in B.C.

Regards,
Estee

2016-05-13 15:16:42
MiriamLangleyHalifax Nova Scotia

Please do not build the Site C dam. It is short- sighted to think jobs will be available for years. Only people at the very top of the construction companies will make big money & they will keep it for themselves.

My concerns are what will the people eat if this rich farmland dis destroyed.

Why do we not respect our Indigenous people?
Why do we not listen to the scientists?
Why do we not think long, long term?.
Why do we not respect our earth?

My great great grandchildren will be sickened by the destruction of the earth. Destruction that can be prevented. Many more jobs can be had through research in other fields to bring us needed electricity. What about geo-thermal power?

It is very disrespectful of huge construction conglomerates to continue desecrating our natural beauty & using the court's lack of decision to hide behind.

2016-05-13 15:33:33
AbeLevyBonita SpringsFlorida

My wife and I have visited most of the provinces in Canada over the last 50 years and several provinces multiple times including cruise ship ports, camping visits to parks, and back country camping, as well as driving through provinces and visiting cities.

We urge you to stop BC Hydro from building the Site C dam completely.

2016-05-13 15:37:45
JChurcherVancouverBritish Columbia

Dear Ms Wilson-Raybould,

I am very concerned with the irreparable damage Site C will cause people, ecosystems, as well as downstream (temporally) heritage and environmental benefit (fertile valley in warming climate where other growing regions are in jeopardy).

I urge you, the federal government, to use your power to halt this ill-conceived, last-millennium-mindset power project.
DENY BC Hydro the permits related to continued construction of the dam (from Fisheries, Coast Guard, and Transport) in order to allow time for outstanding court cases to be heard and decided.
EXERCISE LEADERSHIP in moving Canada in new and innovative directions with power. We can do better than projects like this.

I suspect you are familiar with all of the arguments against this project. I have not heard one point that sounds ill-founded or overblown.

However, my biggest objection is that if we are to move away from fossil fuels and traditional ways of harnessing energy, we MUST think differently and deliver power to communities in new and different, ways.

What about distributed power sources that fuel a grid?
What about geothermal, solar?
We don't need to flood and destroy massive amounts of land.
We don't need to use power lines over long distances to then distribute this hydro power.

Thank you for your consideration.
I hope your government is able to show real leadership at this time on our planet when it is critical.
Sincerely,
J Churcher
V6J 2L2

2016-05-13 15:52:56
TheresaHoodNanaimoBritish Columbia

I am against the construction of the Site C dam, the destruction of habitat and the disrespect for Indigenous rights.

Business as usual does not work any longer. 50- 100 years is not long range thinking.

There are many brilliant minds working on better solutions. Back these people to make real change in our society not just bandaid solutions that cause more problems down the road.

Corporations, if they have responsibilities to their shareholders should also be paying for the real costs of doing business such as environmental degradation, inequality leading to poverty and lack of opportunities for all but the very well off.

We need real long term solutions, thinking far outside the box, and politicians with the courage to look well beyond the next election.

2016-05-13 16:03:38
ABonvouloirSunnyvaleCalifornia

Activities of this sort have continent -wide ramifications.
Indigenous peoples of North America have been abused more than enough---pipelines, pollution, tar sands, exclusion from decision-making bodies are a trait of Harper's government and should be reversed immediately. Certainly, no new abuses of the continent and the people on it should even be being considered.

2016-05-13 16:03:39
AlanLewisVancouverBritish Columbia

ENABLE THOROUGH ASSESSMENT OF SITE C PROJECT BY THE BC UTILITIES COMMISSION -- PRIOR TO COURT CASES BY FIRST NATIONS AND LANDOWNERS.

2016-05-13 16:21:10
AlanLewisVancouverBritish Columbia

ENABLE THOROUGH ASSESSMENT OF SITE C PROJECT BY THE BC UTILITIES COMMISSION -- PRIOR TO COURT CASES BY FIRST NATIONS AND LANDOWNERS.

2016-05-13 16:21:12
DaphneKelgardCranbrookBritish Columbia

Dear Wayne
There is no doubt that you will receive any number of letters from constituents about the Site C dam so I will be brief.

Since the province has not had the proper authority to begin the construction because of their failure to consult as set out not only by our Supreme Court but also in the international treaty which the federal government in the form of Carolyn Bennett has just signed, it behooves the federal government to put the construction on hold until all of the requisite processes have been completed. Not to do so will result in damage that will be irremediable.

There is no need to proceed with this very ungreen power production which by its very nature adds significantly to the carbon load. Moreover, as climate change wreaks havoc with the environment, we will need all the agricultural lands we have to grow food for ourselves and the world.

Thank you for your attention to this issue.

Daphne Kelgard
209 - 2515 12th St N
Cranbrook BC V1C 5X3

2016-05-13 16:31:26
DaphneKelgardCranbrookBritish Columbia

Dear Wayne
There is no doubt that you will receive any number of letters from constituents about the Site C dam so I will be brief.

Since the province has not had the proper authority to begin the construction because of their failure to consult as set out not only by our Supreme Court but also in the international treaty which the federal government in the form of Carolyn Bennett has just signed, it behooves the federal government to put the construction on hold until all of the requisite processes have been completed. Not to do so will result in damage that will be irremediable.

There is no need to proceed with this very ungreen power production which by its very nature adds significantly to the carbon load. Moreover, as climate change wreaks havoc with the environment, we will need all the agricultural lands we have to grow food for ourselves and the world.

Thank you for your attention to this issue.

Daphne Kelgard
209 - 2515 12th St N
Cranbrook BC V1C 5X3

2016-05-13 16:31:29
DaphneKelgardCranbrookBritish Columbia

Dear Wayne
There is no doubt that you will receive any number of letters from constituents about the Site C dam so I will be brief.

Since the province has not had the proper authority to begin the construction because of their failure to consult as set out not only by our Supreme Court but also in the international treaty which the federal government in the form of Carolyn Bennett has just signed, it behooves the federal government to put the construction on hold until all of the requisite processes have been completed. Not to do so will result in damage that will be irremediable.

There is no need to proceed with this very ungreen power production which by its very nature adds significantly to the carbon load. Moreover, as climate change wreaks havoc with the environment, we will need all the agricultural lands we have to grow food for ourselves and the world.

Thank you for your attention to this issue.

Daphne Kelgard
209 - 2515 12th St N
Cranbrook BC V1C 5X3

2016-05-13 16:31:31
HughTysonSalmon ArmBritish Columbia

Since the matter is 'before the courts', it is therefore outrageous that work on clearing the area is now - and has been - proceeding apace, as though the economic, agricultural and environmental aspects of this project were nothing to do with the proponents and the BC government. And on top of this, the First Nations claims and rights have not been dealt with. Yet the land they have a right to use is under destruction.

This handling of the proposal is outrageous, and an open invitation to a divisive, nasty, long lasting confrontation, with permanent damage to forming a collaborative, cooperative and united society. It is exactly NOT the way to proceed. It demolishes Justin Trudeau's statement during the past election campaign, that - 'Governments grant permits, communities grant permission'. It would appear that this was just disingenuous sophistry, or more more colloquially - bullshit.

The economic basis for this project has been dealt with in detail by the Joint Review Panel.They registered dissatisfaction with the submission by the proponents. Other experts have added similar conclusions. The destruction of so much first class agricultural land, in the face of the oncoming, accelerating, monstrous climate change challenge, is lunacy. Predictions indicate that large areas of what is now agricultural land south of the 49th. parallel, will become unproductive from such changes. How is that loss of food production to be balanced ?

Finally, the federal/provincial governments' case for supporting this project has not been made public. This (a) indicates that 'transparency' is a bogus claim by the new federal government, and (b) indicates that the government case would not withstand expert public scrutiny.

2016-05-13 16:54:12
HughTysonSalmon ArmBritish Columbia

Since the matter is 'before the courts', it is therefore outrageous that work on clearing the area is now - and has been - proceeding apace, as though the economic, agricultural and environmental aspects of this project were nothing to do with the proponents and the BC government. And on top of this, the First Nations claims and rights have not been dealt with. Yet the land they have a right to use is under destruction.

This handling of the proposal is outrageous, and an open invitation to a divisive, nasty, long lasting confrontation, with permanent damage to forming a collaborative, cooperative and united society. It is exactly NOT the way to proceed. It demolishes Justin Trudeau's statement during the past election campaign, that - 'Governments grant permits, communities grant permission'. It would appear that this was just disingenuous sophistry, or more more colloquially - bullshit.

The economic basis for this project has been dealt with in detail by the Joint Review Panel.They registered dissatisfaction with the submission by the proponents. Other experts have added similar conclusions. The destruction of so much first class agricultural land, in the face of the oncoming, accelerating, monstrous climate change challenge, is lunacy. Predictions indicate that large areas of what is now agricultural land south of the 49th. parallel, will become unproductive from such changes. How is that loss of food production to be balanced ?

Finally, the federal/provincial governments' case for supporting this project has not been made public. This (a) indicates that 'transparency' is a bogus claim by the new federal government, and (b) indicates that the government case would not withstand expert public scrutiny.

2016-05-13 16:55:22
ClaudeRobertSheffordQuebec

The dam will undermine the natives use of the land and for many other reasons please stop Site C dam

2016-05-13 19:13:23
PriyankaSekharMarkhamOntario

MP Bob Saroya,

Please stand against the building of the Site C dam and help stop the continued construction of the dam until this issue is resolved.

Federal officials repeatedly state that they can’t comment on Site C because “it’s before the courts.” Don’t let them get away with this non-answer!

The court process could take years to resolve, especially if the federal government continues to fight against the First Nations and the landowners in these cases. Meanwhile construction of the dam continues. BC Premier Christy Clark has even said that her goal is to get the dam to “the point of no return.”

BC Hydro has to obtain permits related to continued construction of the dam from the Ministry of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard, as well as from the Ministry of Transport. They have the power to deny these permits and halt construction, which in turn would allow for a thorough assessment of the project by the BC Utilities Commission and would also allow time for the outstanding court cases by First Nations and landowners to be heard and decided upon.

The joint federal-provincial environmental impact assessment concluded that construction of the dam would severely and permanently undermine Indigenous peoples’ use of the land; harm rare plants and other biodiversity; make fishing unsafe for at least a generation; and submerge burial grounds and other crucial cultural and historical sites.

The federal and provincial approvals for the project were given on the basis of the claim that these serious, permanent harms to the environment and Indigenous culture were “justified” by the benefits of the project but they won’t provide us with any details of this ‘justification’ made behind closed doors.

“The Peace River Valley can provide fruits and vegetables for over a million people per year. Forty-four percent of the foods that can be economically grown in BC are still being imported! Fruits and vegetables are the most deficient categories of those food sources. The Peace River valley is capable of producing a variety of crops comparable to BC’s fertile Fraser Valley. As world prices for food escalate, the land BC Hydro plans to flood for Site C is our food security Plan B. Site C dam may have a 100-year life, but the agricultural land in the Peace Valley will support life in perpetuity.” – Economic agrologist Wendy Holm. BC

The Joint Review Panel was unsatisfied with the need for and the cost of the project as well as the lack of research into alternatives to Site C. The Chair of the Joint Review Panel, economist, Dr. Harry Swain took the unprecedented step of speaking out on these concerns repeatedly in the media, after the governments decided to proceed with Site C without paying heed to these key recommendations.

Additionally, Dr. Swain stated that if the government wished to proceed with Site C, then these matters of concern should be thoroughly assessed by the independent, arms-length-from-government, British Columbia Utilities Commission. The government’s response to this was to state that these particular matters of concern were actually outside the mandate of the Joint Review Panel! This issue is now before the courts!

Several leading economists from both Canada and the U.S. have determined that better and less expensive alternatives to Site C exist. Robert McCullough stated that BC Hydro used data for comparisons that was up to 5 years out of date. The cost of many renewables has come down significantly in the last year or two. Additionally, alternative projects, including geothermal would provide far more long-term jobs in various locations throughout the province and are less risky as they can be built on an as-needed basis.
BC Hydro has stated in court that the legal implications in respect to the Treaty rights of First Nations were never considered at any point in the decision-making process

2016-05-13 19:31:00
RossWrightSioux Falls South Dakota

Dear Prime Minister Trudeau,
We all live down-stream, down-river, and down-wind. There are too many interests that have been ignored with the Site C project, whether they be environmental, or the ill-contrived expenditure of limited tax dollars, or the complete removal of First Nations from the political process. It is time for you to start leaving your legacy. Please prevent this scar from being foisted upon the land-scape.

2016-05-13 22:50:43
RossWrightSioux Falls South Dakota

Dear Prime Minister Trudeau,
We all live down-stream, down-river, and down-wind. There are too many interests that have been ignored with the Site C project, whether they be environmental, or the ill-contrived expenditure of limited tax dollars, or the complete removal of First Nations from the political process. It is time for you to start leaving your legacy. Please prevent this scar from being foisted upon the land-scape.

2016-05-13 22:51:06
RossWrightSioux Falls South Dakota

Dear Prime Minister Trudeau,
We all live down-stream, down-river, and down-wind. There are too many interests that have been ignored with the Site C project, whether they be environmental, or the ill-contrived expenditure of limited tax dollars, or the complete removal of First Nations from the political process. It is time for you to start leaving your legacy. Please prevent this scar from being foisted upon the land-scape.

2016-05-13 22:51:53
RossWrightSioux Falls South Dakota

Dear Prime Minister Trudeau,
We all live down-stream, down-river, and down-wind. There are too many interests that have been ignored with the Site C project, whether they be environmental, or the ill-contrived expenditure of limited tax dollars, or the complete removal of First Nations from the political process. It is time for you to start leaving your legacy. Please prevent this scar from being foisted upon the land-scape.

2016-05-13 22:52:58
RossWrightSioux Falls South Dakota

Dear Prime Minister Trudeau,
We all live down-stream, down-river, and down-wind. There are too many interests that have been ignored with the Site C project, whether they be environmental, or the ill-contrived expenditure of limited tax dollars, or the complete removal of First Nations from the political process. It is time for you to start leaving your legacy. Please prevent this scar from being foisted upon the land-scape.

2016-05-13 22:53:06
JanetParkinsColdstreamBritish Columbia

The federal government has promised a new era of reconciliation with First Nations, environmental protection, food security and transition to clean energy. Site C threatens all these promises. Dam construction must stop until the court has made a final decision. As your constituent I expect you to do the right thing.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Janet Parkins

2016-05-13 22:58:59
HelenIbleSecheltBritish Columbia

1) it will render unusable valuable farmland which will be increasingly necessary in the near future because of global warming.
2) it breaks faith with indigenous people of the region and more broadly across Canada.
3) it is essentially unnecessary as the interior of BC is highly suited to other means of generating power--wind, solar, and geothermal, but especially solar.
4)It will destroy a biologically diverse ecosystem.
5)BC already generates energy in excess of its needs.
6)it seems silly to export hydro power to oil-rich Alberta. Alberta can phase out its coal -fired power generation with its reserves of gas and oil. Let Alberta harness the sun and wind, of which it has an abundance year round.

2016-05-14 00:28:14
VegasRockafellerMetuchenNew Jersey

This dam will interfere with the indangered and non indangered fish making their yearly migrations up or down the rive. This will also effect the Yellowstone to Yukon efferts to protect the magnificent Rocky Mountain region.

2016-05-14 01:12:10
RobNashVernonBritish Columbia

No to site c. I want to look to the future, not the past.

2016-05-14 01:21:29
MarionStottsRadium Hot SpringsBritish Columbia

Wayne Stetski,
I oppose the building of the Site C Dam and would like to see a holt on all construction until all concerns are addressed. The damage to the environment and ecosystem of all dams is unacceptable, especially for a project that is not required. The need of British Columbians for electricity has been met by existing projects.

Eliminating needed agricultural land at a time when food security is critical, can not be a wise choice. We have the capacity to feed the people of our province and beyond and this must be a priority.

Indigenous lands and their Sacred meaning to our First People has to be honoured as another priority.

I urge you to listen to the opposition to this project and take action to protect the Site C lands.
Please see that the permits are denied and construction halted.
Sincerely,
Marion Stotts

2016-05-14 02:00:25
HenrikAsfeldtAthabascaAlberta

I urge you to halt any further construction on the Site C dam on the Peace River.

The loss of excellent agricultural land in northern BC is especially problematic in the context of climate change which is likely to make more southerly agricultural lands less productive.

The electricity generated by this project has not been demonstrated to be needed and there are other potential sources of electricity in BC, namely geothermal, that are less environmentally destructive.

There is a myriad of other adverse impacts both social and environmental that make this project problematic.

Please halt this project.

2016-05-14 03:49:48
AlexAltosaarArgentaBritish Columbia

Enough valleys have been flooded and ruined forever. Let's not keep screwing ourselves and our grandchildren over! Please help stop this huge environmental mess from happening.

2016-05-14 04:01:28
DaveManningPender IslandBritish Columbia

Please, this dam is unnecessary and would destroy such a lovely bit of BC land, not to mention displacing people from their way of being.
When it's gone, it's gone. We can't make any more naturally beautiful areas. Why can't humans just let things be?

2016-05-14 06:25:41
KathrynBraggKetch HarbourNova Scotia

My concerns about Site C dam are extensive after reviewing pertinent information. Flooding rich agricultural land does not make any sense in this day and age. Buy local is what Canadians should be striving for. You can't buy local if agricultural land is destroyed.

Indigenous people need to be consulted before any more damage is done to this area. Is that not one of the mandates of this Liberal government?

If a joint federal-provincial impact assessment showed that not only would construction of this dam impact indigenous peoples' use of the land, but would also destroy rare foliage and impact fishing for years, why has the federal government continued to grant permits to BC Hydro? I thought this government was the polar opposite of Harper's Conservatives. Your inaction to halt the progress of this dam until the outstanding court case by First Nations and landowners is decided is very much a Harper move. Start behaving like the environment is important to this Liberal government as you have led Canadians to believe.

2016-05-14 17:39:01
DianePerryDuncanBritish Columbia

Site C dam will flood thousands of acres of Class 1 soil. Class 1 soil is the best soil we have and is a precious resource. It can feed up to a million people This may be a relevant fact with the advent of climate change.

Site C dam is neither green (clean) nor sustainable. It would be a devastating thing to build.

Please reconsider.

Diane Perry

2016-05-14 18:36:48
SeanDanielsCoquitlamBritish Columbia

There is too much destruction going on not for the betterment of the World but for corporations and the 1 percent.

“The Peace River Valley can provide fruits and vegetables for over a million people per year. Forty-four percent of the foods that can be economically grown in BC are still being imported! Fruits and vegetables are the most deficient categories of those food sources. The Peace River valley is capable of producing a variety of crops comparable to BC’s fertile Fraser Valley. As world prices for food escalate, the land BC Hydro plans to flood for Site C is our food security Plan B. Site C dam may have a 100-year life, but the agricultural land in the Peace Valley will support life in perpetuity.” – Economic agrologist Wendy Holm. BC

2016-05-14 19:31:20
AlisonThompsonCalgaryAlberta

Hello Honourable MP Kent Hehr,
You better know me as the chair of the Canadian Geothermal Energy Association, CanGEA, who is a constituent company in your riding. As you know, I also live in your riding.

CanGEA has provided information to the BC gov't, BC Hydro and the BC Auditor General about how geothermal power can be a substitute for Site C's capacity and energy. Geothermal energy is a superior product over large scale hydropower in many ways including:

-more jobs

-economic diversity throughout BC and AB where the skilled drilling labour and subsurface geoskills would come from

-geothermal greenhouses provide food security in addition to the farmland that would be saved if the Peace Region were not flooded

-considered fully renewable by the UN; Large dams are not

-geothermal energy has full First Nations support

-provides access to deep lithium deposit that can be co-produced with geothermal energy, thus providing a rare earth element sovereignty for our knowledge economy

We captured all of these advantages, and more, in a report that can be accessed on our website: http://www.cangea.ca/reports--resource-material.html The report is called: Geothermal Energy - The renewable and cost effective alternative to Site C.

If you'd like to be further briefed, I welcome an in person meeting, as a concerned citizen and/or the chair of CanGEA.

Warm Regards,
(and I hope to see you later this month at the Canadian Club luncheon)

alison

2016-05-14 19:59:57
ValerieRuddSouth Lake TahoeCalifornia

I urge you not to permit the construction of the Site C dam. My family has spent time nearly every summer camping and exploring BC since our daughter was 7 years old. She is now 33.

2016-05-14 21:35:03
JaniceRiderCalgaryAlberta

I continue to be concerned about the Site C Dam and its construction. Although concerns are being addressed through the courts, litigation is a lengthy process and, in the meantime, the construction of the dam continues. First Nations' and landowners' rights require consideration. It is appalling to me that work on the dam is allowed to continue while the case is being reviewed in court. This is unethical and directly in opposition to the democratic process. The Ministry of Fisheries, Oceans, the Canadian Coast Guard, and the Ministry of Transport have the power to deny permits for construction and stop the work until the case has been heard and a decision has been reached. This is exactly what they should do.

Site C Dam is being constructed in an area full of biodiversity, a biodiversity that we require for a healthy ecosystem. Rare flora (for instance bryophytes -mosses and liverworts) and fauna (including so far uncatalogued insects) exist along an 80 km river system. As fauna go, fish, who rely on being able to get to spawning areas, will be amongst those impacted the most. 13,000 acres of farmland will vanish underwater. Perhaps we should consider the fact that, in a warming world, the importance of arable land on which to grow food cannot be overstated. The Peace River Valley is capable of producing a variety of crops, including fruits and vegetables that are currently being imported.

Site C is also an area replete with places of historical and cultural significance. Many of these particular places are of special interest to First Nations, a group of people whose interests we have consistently attempted to subordinate to our own. It's time we started "walking our talk" in relation to First Nations.

Perhaps as an alternative to Site C, we need to look at renewable options such as geothermal.

Whatever the courts decide, construction should not be ongoing during legal deliberations.

Yours truly,

Janice Rider

2016-05-14 23:24:33
Ivy Smith VancouverBritish Columbia

“The Peace River Valley can provide fruits and vegetables for over a million people per year. Forty-four percent of the foods that can be economically grown in BC are still being imported! Fruits and vegetables are the most deficient categories of those food sources. The Peace River valley is capable of producing a variety of crops comparable to BC’s fertile Fraser Valley. As world prices for food escalate, the land BC Hydro plans to flood for Site C is our food security Plan B. Site C dam may have a 100-year life, but the agricultural land in the Peace Valley will support life in perpetuity.” – Economic agrologist Wendy Holm. BC

Additionally, Dr. Swain stated that if the government wished to proceed with Site C, then these matters of concern should be thoroughly assessed by the independent, arms-length-from-government, British Columbia Utilities Commission. The government’s response to this was to state that these particular matters of concern were actually outside the mandate of the Joint Review Panel! This issue is now before the courts!

Several leading economists from both Canada and the U.S. have determined that better and less expensive alternatives to Site C exist. Robert McCullough stated that BC Hydro used data for comparisons that was up to 5 years out of date. The cost of many renewables has come down significantly in the last year or two. Additionally, alternative projects, including geothermal would provide far more long-term jobs in various locations throughout the province and are less risky as they can be built on an as-needed basis.
BC Hydro has stated in court that the legal implications in respect to the Treaty rights of First Nations were never considered at any point in the decision-making process.

2016-05-15 00:41:28
TomasErssonBeaconsfieldQuebec

Dear Federal government,
you have the power to stop the Site C dam in BC and save BC and Canadian tax payers billions of dollars. Site C dam is a resource-inefficient project compared to the alternative energy sources like solar, wind, and woody biomass.

Site C dam would result in the largest withdrawal from the agricultural land reserve in BC’s history. As a former BC resident who knows how little agricultural land BC has, I find this totally unacceptable in 2016. This is not the 1950s. We should be respecting the land more than by simply flooding it.

Site C would cause significant and irreparable harm to fish and migratory bird species. This is totally unacceptable to all Canadians.

Site C would significantly impact First Nations’ ability to carry out their cultural practices and rights. Construction of the dam could impact up to 337 archaeological sites, including ancestral gravesites.
This is also totally unacceptable. Whatever happened to you Liberals promise to treat First Nations with respect??

Stop the Site C dam!

2016-05-15 02:18:06
KalibriWoodCrawford BayBritish Columbia

It simply NOT worth developing - keep it natural. It just not worth the consequences of adding a dam. It's really not worth the consequences. Please stop the process of putting in this dam.

2016-05-15 03:03:31
PaulGrayhurstKimberleyBritish Columbia

Dear Mr Stetski,

I am writing today to express my concerns about the continued construction of the Site C dam. Though I live in Kimberley, my grandfather homesteaded in the BC Peace in 1928. I have been lucky enough to visit the old homestead and see for myself the beauty and fertility of this important agricultural region.

I do not understand how this project can be built while the issue is still before the courts. The Joint Review Committee was unconvinced of the need for this project as well as the cost of the project and the lack of research into alternatives. On top of this, permits from the MInistry of Fisheries and Oceans as well as from the MInistry of Transport have yet to be obtained.

This project should be reviewed by the BC Utilities Commission, prior to being allowed to proceed any further.

Thank you for taking the time to read and consider my points.

Respectfully,
Paul Grayhurst

2016-05-15 16:08:42
trinarowlesvancouverBritish Columbia

Federal officials repeatedly state that they can’t comment on Site C because “it’s before the courts.” Don’t let them get away with this non-answer!

The court process could take years to resolve, especially if the federal government continues to fight against the First Nations and the landowners in these cases. Meanwhile construction of the dam continues. BC Premier Christy Clark has even said that her goal is to get the dam to “the point of no return.”

BC Hydro has to obtain permits related to continued construction of the dam from the Ministry of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard, as well as from the Ministry of Transport. They have the power to deny these permits and halt construction, which in turn would allow for a thorough assessment of the project by the BC Utilities Commission and would also allow time for the outstanding court cases by First Nations and landowners to be heard and decided upon.

The joint federal-provincial environmental impact assessment concluded that construction of the dam would severely and permanently undermine Indigenous peoples’ use of the land; harm rare plants and other biodiversity; make fishing unsafe for at least a generation; and submerge burial grounds and other crucial cultural and historical sites.

The federal and provincial approvals for the project were given on the basis of the claim that these serious, permanent harms to the environment and Indigenous culture were “justified” by the benefits of the project but they won’t provide us with any details of this ‘justification’ made behind closed doors.

“The Peace River Valley can provide fruits and vegetables for over a million people per year. Forty-four percent of the foods that can be economically grown in BC are still being imported! Fruits and vegetables are the most deficient categories of those food sources. The Peace River valley is capable of producing a variety of crops comparable to BC’s fertile Fraser Valley. As world prices for food escalate, the land BC Hydro plans to flood for Site C is our food security Plan B. Site C dam may have a 100-year life, but the agricultural land in the Peace Valley will support life in perpetuity.” – Economic agrologist Wendy Holm. BC

The Joint Review Panel was unsatisfied with the need for and the cost of the project as well as the lack of research into alternatives to Site C. The Chair of the Joint Review Panel, economist, Dr. Harry Swain took the unprecedented step of speaking out on these concerns repeatedly in the media, after the governments decided to proceed with Site C without paying heed to these key recommendations.

Additionally, Dr. Swain stated that if the government wished to proceed with Site C, then these matters of concern should be thoroughly assessed by the independent, arms-length-from-government, British Columbia Utilities Commission. The government’s response to this was to state that these particular matters of concern were actually outside the mandate of the Joint Review Panel! This issue is now before the courts!

Several leading economists from both Canada and the U.S. have determined that better and less expensive alternatives to Site C exist. Robert McCullough stated that BC Hydro used data for comparisons that was up to 5 years out of date. The cost of many renewables has come down significantly in the last year or two. Additionally, alternative projects, including geothermal would provide far more long-term jobs in various locations throughout the province and are less risky as they can be built on an as-needed basis.
BC Hydro has stated in court that the legal implications in respect to the Treaty rights of First Nations were never considered at any point in the decision-making process.

2016-05-15 20:32:59
JakeHodieTorontoOntario

Dear MP,

NO to Site C!!!!!

So much of our wilderness and waters have already been ruined by mining, drilling, development, and man.
Enough is enough!
The wilderness and waters are supposed to be a place of peace and quiet for us, and the fish and wildlife which live in them and/or rely on them!
The animals are running out of places to live and be safe. Our wildlife are under threat from so many angles. They desperately need to be protected, mainly from humans.
Life is hard enough for people, let alone the animals.
Can't we please offer them some much needed help?!
PLEASE save the Peace River Valley wilderness and waters for all future generations before they are permanently ruined. Some damage cannot be undone!

Several leading economists from both Canada and the U.S. have determined that better and less expensive alternatives to Site C exist!

BC Hydro has to obtain permits related to continued construction of the dam from the Ministry of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard, as well as from the Ministry of Transport. They have the power to deny these permits and halt construction, which in turn would allow for a thorough assessment of the project by the BC Utilities Commission and would also allow time for the outstanding court cases by First Nations and landowners to be heard and decided upon.

The federal and provincial approvals for the project were given on the basis of the claim that these serious, permanent harms to the environment and Indigenous culture were “justified” by the benefits of the project but they won’t provide us with any details of this ‘justification’ made behind closed doors.

Thank you for your time.

Sincerely,
Mark Hodie
Toronto

2016-05-16 13:57:09
JenniferParkerTorontoOntario

The joint federal-provincial environmental impact assessment concluded that construction of the dam would severely and permanently undermine Indigenous peoples’ use of the land; harm rare plants and other biodiversity; make fishing unsafe for at least a generation; and submerge burial grounds and other crucial cultural and historical sites.

Several leading economists from both Canada and the U.S. have determined that better and less expensive alternatives to Site C exist. Robert McCullough stated that BC Hydro used data for comparisons that was up to 5 years out of date. The cost of many renewables has come down significantly in the last year or two. Additionally, alternative projects, including geothermal would provide far more long-term jobs in various locations throughout the province and are less risky as they can be built on an as-needed basis.
BC Hydro has stated in court that the legal implications in respect to the Treaty rights of First Nations were never considered at any point in the decision-making process.

Please do the right thing.

2016-05-16 17:49:29
AlexKentCalgaryAlberta

Geothermal energy is a superior product over large scale hydropower because Canada needs more than electricity to turn around the loss to our economy from the price drop in oil. Canada needs more jobs (geothermal provides this), economic diversification (geothermal provides this), get out of work oil/gas experts back leading productive lives (geothermal would do this), get social license to that the project can proceed without social disruption (geothermal has licence)

CanGEA has spoken to all of these point in our report that can be accessed on our website: http://www.cangea.ca/reports--resource-material.html The report is called: Geothermal Energy - The renewable and cost effective alternative to Site C.

If you are interested in what geothermal energy can do for BC, AB and the rest of Canada, I would be happy to meet you in person. I hope this has found you well.

2016-05-17 21:13:36
CarolineBrownVancouverBritish Columbia

Dear Dr. Hedy Fry,

You may remember me as the Campaign Coordinator for the Greens! This is my first letter to you as my MP - how exciting!!

I am writing to you today, because your office hours are during work hours and I can't come down and meet you personally or else I would!

Any who:

Please, do not let the federal government approve the permits from the Department of Fisheries and Ocean Transport Canada that Site C needs in order to continue development. Do you know that they will stun the poor salmon to move them from on side of Site C to the other side? And, if you haven't read recently, it's been reported that fish (yes, fish) have thoughts and feeling. WHY DO HUMANS THINK THIS IS OK, to treat other inhabitants of our world like this. I don't want to get all philosophical on you, but don't you think if we've lose compassion for all living things then we will lose compassion for ourselves?

Lastly, Site C is an economic and environmental disaster. You know this, I know this, soon the public will know this. (Hopefully, not before it's too late). We need renewable energy! Also, while I'm here, please do not let any pipelines be permitted. I plan on living a long and healthy life with very few tankers on our coast and not having to deal with a catastrophic oil spill in my life time. No thank you.

Take care,
Caroline Brown

2016-05-17 21:47:32
LeslieStanickSurreyBritish Columbia

Dear Mr. Sarai,

I live in your riding, and am deeply concerned about the BC government's continued push to complete the Site C dam, despite the fact that the First Nations have claims before the courts. All awarding of contracts for turbines and other components of the dam must stop immediately until the issues before the courts have been decided.

Premier Christy Clark is pushing ahead, awarding expensive contracts in the millions of dollars which BC taxpayers will be paying for for generations. We cannot let the BC government over-ride the rights of First Nations communities, whose sacred burial sites will be flooded, whose forests and agricultural land will be flooded. The Peace River will be dammed, impeding the flow of salmon from upstream impacting the food security of First Nations communities.

The Peace River region has some of the most arable land in BC. With the rising temperatures and increasing forest fires in the province, we NEED that farmland for food security. We NEED that river for environmental and food security reasons for the First Nations, and perhaps for many in BC.

We do NOT need an expensive dam costed at $8.8 Billion...but we know there will be cost overruns that British Columbians will be paying for far into the future.

I urge you to please deny all permits for this ill-conceived dam, and stop the process in its tracks. I wold be delighted to meet with you to discuss the cancellation of this unneeded dam.

Thank you.

Sincerely,
Leslie Roxanne Stanick
210-10665 1390th St.
Surrey, BC,
V3T 4L8

Tel: 604-728-4471 [email protected]

2016-05-18 08:38:27
ElizabethPsyllakisVictoriaBritish Columbia

I am concerned by the Governments,both Federal and Provincial,seeming lack of concern and condescending, patronizing stance with regard site C on the Peace River. Few, if any, answers to requests for clarity on the decision making are given. Certainly the Party line that this damn is in our best interest is not acceptable to me. There will be far reaching consequences if this project is to proceed.

Disrespect of First Nations Treaty rights; impact on endangered species habitat, salmon run, and other species of fish; loss of land from the ALR and the homes on that land.

The magnitude of the project and the cost to the tax payer is not insignificant. There are more and more means to create green energy being discovered and utilized all the time. The site C project has been turned down so many times over decades and for good reasons. The present Government seems to have a short memory and does not credit the Public for being well informed and less passive than in the past.

The Federal Government cannot 'comment' on site C because it is before the Courts then It is my opinion that ,at the very least, site C should be put on hold until the cases before the Courts are heard.

Sincerely ;

Elizabeth Psyllakis

T

2016-05-23 01:09:03
ElizabethPsyllakisVictoriaBritish Columbia

I am concerned by the Governments,both Federal and Provincial,seeming lack of concern and condescending, patronizing stance with regard site C on the Peace River. Few, if any, answers to requests for clarity on the decision making are given. Certainly the Party line that this damn is in our best interest is not acceptable to me. There will be far reaching consequences if this project were to proceed.

Disrespect of First Nations Treaty rights; impact on endangered species habitat, salmon run, and other species of fish; loss of land from the ALR and the homes on that land.

The magnitude of the project and the cost to the tax payer is not insignificant. There are more and more means to create green energy being discovered and utilized all the time. The site C project has been turned down so many times over decades and for good reasons. The present Government seems to have a short memory and does not credit the Public for being well informed and less passive than in the past.

If the Federal Government cannot 'comment' on site C because it is before the Courts then It is my opinion that ,at the very least, site C should be put on hold until the cases before the Courts are heard.

Sincerely ;

Elizabeth Psyllakis

T

2016-05-23 01:11:58
VanessaBateWinlawBritish Columbia

more homes,farms, fish habitat and wilderness due to unnecessary exploitation of the land, and then flooded, will be lost again and forever. canadian natural waterways need to be kept in tact from now on. missy clark's agenda for site c dam is a disgrace to our provinces' integrity for a more naturally sustainable power resource. site c dam is not what we need. pay attention to the fact that this is prime agricultural land and growing food here is what is and going to become very important. first nations have sacred burial grounds here and should not be disturbed. sincerely vanessa bate. the slocan valley, b.c.

2016-05-23 05:45:26
trinarowlesvancouverBritish Columbia

The court process could take years to resolve, especially if the federal government continues to fight against the First Nations and the landowners in these cases. Meanwhile construction of the dam continues. BC Premier Christy Clark has even said that her goal is to get the dam to “the point of no return.”

BC Hydro has to obtain permits related to continued construction of the dam from the Ministry of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard, as well as from the Ministry of Transport. They have the power to deny these permits and halt construction, which in turn would allow for a thorough assessment of the project by the BC Utilities Commission and would also allow time for the outstanding court cases by First Nations and landowners to be heard and decided upon.

The joint federal-provincial environmental impact assessment concluded that construction of the dam would severely and permanently undermine Indigenous peoples’ use of the land; harm rare plants and other biodiversity; make fishing unsafe for at least a generation; and submerge burial grounds and other crucial cultural and historical sites.

The federal and provincial approvals for the project were given on the basis of the claim that these serious, permanent harms to the environment and Indigenous culture were “justified” by the benefits of the project but they won’t provide us with any details of this ‘justification’ made behind closed doors.

“The Peace River Valley can provide fruits and vegetables for over a million people per year. Forty-four percent of the foods that can be economically grown in BC are still being imported! Fruits and vegetables are the most deficient categories of those food sources. The Peace River valley is capable of producing a variety of crops comparable to BC’s fertile Fraser Valley. As world prices for food escalate, the land BC Hydro plans to flood for Site C is our food security Plan B. Site C dam may have a 100-year life, but the agricultural land in the Peace Valley will support life in perpetuity.” – Economic agrologist Wendy Holm. BC

The Joint Review Panel was unsatisfied with the need for and the cost of the project as well as the lack of research into alternatives to Site C. The Chair of the Joint Review Panel, economist, Dr. Harry Swain took the unprecedented step of speaking out on these concerns repeatedly in the media, after the governments decided to proceed with Site C without paying heed to these key recommendations.

Additionally, Dr. Swain stated that if the government wished to proceed with Site C, then these matters of concern should be thoroughly assessed by the independent, arms-length-from-government, British Columbia Utilities Commission. The government’s response to this was to state that these particular matters of concern were actually outside the mandate of the Joint Review Panel! This issue is now before the courts!

Several leading economists from both Canada and the U.S. have determined that better and less expensive alternatives to Site C exist. Robert McCullough stated that BC Hydro used data for comparisons that was up to 5 years out of date. The cost of many renewables has come down significantly in the last year or two. Additionally, alternative projects, including geothermal would provide far more long-term jobs in various locations throughout the province and are less risky as they can be built on an as-needed basis.
BC Hydro has stated in court that the legal implications in respect to the Treaty rights of First Nations were never considered at any point in the decision-making process.

2016-05-24 19:55:12
MarthaParidaenCowleyAlberta

I think that it is our responsibility to make sure the Dam on the Peace is not allowed to proceed. The former Conservative government acted like Dictators in the management of resources and now it is time to be responsible. We are merely Stewards of this land for future generations. Lets do something responsible for the environment for a change and STOP this development!

2016-05-24 19:56:22
CAROLCOLLINSDOVERDelaware

Federal officials repeatedly state that they can’t comment on Site C because “it’s before the courts.” Don’t let them get away with this non-answer!

The court process could take years to resolve, especially if the federal government continues to fight against the First Nations and the landowners in these cases. Meanwhile construction of the dam continues. BC Premier Christy Clark has even said that her goal is to get the dam to “the point of no return.”

BC Hydro has to obtain permits related to continued construction of the dam from the Ministry of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard, as well as from the Ministry of Transport. They have the power to deny these permits and halt construction, which in turn would allow for a thorough assessment of the project by the BC Utilities Commission and would also allow time for the outstanding court cases by First Nations and landowners to be heard and decided upon.

The joint federal-provincial environmental impact assessment concluded that construction of the dam would severely and permanently undermine Indigenous peoples’ use of the land; harm rare plants and other biodiversity; make fishing unsafe for at least a generation; and submerge burial grounds and other crucial cultural and historical sites.

The federal and provincial approvals for the project were given on the basis of the claim that these serious, permanent harms to the environment and Indigenous culture were “justified” by the benefits of the project but they won’t provide us with any details of this ‘justification’ made behind closed doors.

“The Peace River Valley can provide fruits and vegetables for over a million people per year. Forty-four percent of the foods that can be economically grown in BC are still being imported! Fruits and vegetables are the most deficient categories of those food sources. The Peace River valley is capable of producing a variety of crops comparable to BC’s fertile Fraser Valley. As world prices for food escalate, the land BC Hydro plans to flood for Site C is our food security Plan B. Site C dam may have a 100-year life, but the agricultural land in the Peace Valley will support life in perpetuity.” – Economic agrologist Wendy Holm. BC

The Joint Review Panel was unsatisfied with the need for and the cost of the project as well as the lack of research into alternatives to Site C. The Chair of the Joint Review Panel, economist, Dr. Harry Swain took the unprecedented step of speaking out on these concerns repeatedly in the media, after the governments decided to proceed with Site C without paying heed to these key recommendations.

Additionally, Dr. Swain stated that if the government wished to proceed with Site C, then these matters of concern should be thoroughly assessed by the independent, arms-length-from-government, British Columbia Utilities Commission. The government’s response to this was to state that these particular matters of concern were actually outside the mandate of the Joint Review Panel! This issue is now before the courts!

Several leading economists from both Canada and the U.S. have determined that better and less expensive alternatives to Site C exist. Robert McCullough stated that BC Hydro used data for comparisons that was up to 5 years out of date. The cost of many renewables has come down significantly in the last year or two. Additionally, alternative projects, including geothermal would provide far more long-term jobs in various locations throughout the province and are less risky as they can be built on an as-needed basis.
BC Hydro has stated in court that the legal implications in respect to the Treaty rights of First Nations were never considered at any point in the decision-making process.

2016-05-24 19:56:22
PeterMeissnerCAMBRIDGEOntario

Please don't allow this beautiful land to be flooded. Vote NO when the Site C vote comes up.

2016-05-24 19:58:09
FranziskaNonnenmannTorontoOntario

The federal government's failure to live up to commitments on Indigenous issues and evidence-based decision-making. I ask your government to suspend Site C until more a more rigorous assessment is completed that reflects the new federal government's commitment to science-based decision-making and reconciliation with First Nations

sincerely,
Franziska Nonnenmann
Toronto

2016-05-24 20:03:07
YvonneSchmitzCalgaryAlberta

This is not a sustainable project.

2016-05-24 20:07:16
MeredithRodgerOttawaOntario

My concerns:

the future of the Peace Athabasca Delta and Wood Buffalo National Park.

loss of crucial farm land while global warming dries up other farm lands

development creep - building going ahead before all the court cases and agreements are in place.

PLEASE STOP THIS TRAVESTY ON CANADIAN LAND!!!!

2016-05-24 20:09:55
KarenKrossoyVictoriaBritish Columbia

Dear Ms. May,

Please do everything you can to stop the issuance of permits for the Site-C dam.

Regards,
Karen Krossoy

2016-05-24 20:11:36
stevencapemontrealQuebec

Stop issuing permits for Site C dam -- need I say more.You know the reasons. Make your loved ones proud of you.

2016-05-24 20:11:50
stuartpowseycumberlandBritish Columbia

Hi Gord

I supported you in the last federal election and now I'm asking you to support efforts to stop B.C. from continuing with the site C dam. This dam is completely unnecessary in my opinion as we could easily save this amount of energy from conservation but will never be able to replace the agricultural potential if this land is flooded.

thanks for your attention to this,

Stuart Powsey

2016-05-24 20:16:49
SagewalkerTorontoOntario

All of our natural places need to be preserved. Damns have destroyed so much of them...Please and I know you will, support the obstruction of this terrible violation....

2016-05-24 20:16:53
GarCharlesLevisQuebec

Please help protect the environment by stopping this idiotic project.

2016-05-24 20:20:19
DeannePalaAllistonOntario

RESPECT THIS LAND !!

2016-05-24 20:23:14
VictoriaWhiteLondonOntario

I just learned that the Royal Society of Canada has issued a statement of its own about the Site C Dam project in British Columbia. They clearly state that "work on the the Site C project should be discontinued" due to the issue of treaty infringement.

It's not every day that the Royal Society weighs in, but the case against Site C is now irrefutable. The treaty infringement issue is real. The number and scope of significant adverse environmental effects arising from Site C are unprecedented in the history of environmental assessment in Canada. The regulatory review was severely limited and cannot be considered evidence-based decision-making.

It was such a thrill to know that the Royal Society of Canada had added its voice to the millions of Canadians who, like me, have been signing petitions and raising an outraged voice at the utter and shocking senselessness of this project. This a terrible idea, and one that affects the hearts of Canadians coast to coast. It's about our natural heritage, our agricultural heritage and indigenous treaty rights.

It's also about food security for Canadians.

This quote says it all: "The Peace River Valley can provide fruits and vegetables for over a million people per year. Forty-four percent of the foods that can be economically grown in BC are still being imported! Fruits and vegetables are the most deficient categories of those food sources. The Peace River valley is capable of producing a variety of crops comparable to BC’s fertile Fraser Valley. As world prices for food escalate, the land BC Hydro plans to flood for Site C is our food security Plan B. Site C dam may have a 100-year life, but the agricultural land in the Peace Valley will support life in perpetuity.” – Economic agrologist Wendy Holm. BC

Whether we live in London, Ontario, Laval, Quebec or Vancouver, BC, it matters not. This is a Canadian issue and an issue of abuse of power over the rights of "little Canadians." Please stand against it in Parliament for all of us.

Thank you,

2016-05-24 20:30:20
JamesMulcareClarkstonWashington

Please stop this potential environmental disaster.

2016-05-24 20:30:34
SusanHammondWinlawBritish Columbia

BC Hydro has to obtain permits related to continued construction of the dam from the Ministry of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard, as well as from the Ministry of Transport. They have the power to deny these permits and halt construction, which in turn would allow for a thorough assessment of the project by the BC Utilities Commission and would also allow time for the outstanding court cases by First Nations and landowners to be heard and decided upon.

The joint federal-provincial environmental impact assessment concluded that construction of the dam would severely and permanently undermine Indigenous peoples’ use of the land; harm rare plants and other biodiversity; make fishing unsafe for at least a generation; and submerge burial grounds and other crucial cultural and historical sites.

The federal and provincial approvals for the project were given on the basis of the claim that these serious, permanent harms to the environment and Indigenous culture were “justified” by the benefits of the project but they won’t provide us with any details of this ‘justification’ made behind closed doors.

The Joint Review Panel was unsatisfied with the need for and the cost of the project as well as the lack of research into alternatives to Site C.

Review Panel! This issue is now before the courts!

Several leading economists from both Canada and the U.S. have determined that better and less expensive alternatives to Site C exist. Robert McCullough stated that BC Hydro used data for comparisons that was up to 5 years out of date. The cost of many renewables has come down significantly in the last year or two. Additionally, alternative projects, including geothermal would provide far more long-term jobs in various locations throughout the province and are less risky as they can be built on an as-needed basis.

BC Hydro has stated in court that the legal implications in respect to the Treaty rights of First Nations were never considered at any point in the decision-making process.

2016-05-24 20:47:43
BrianDiamondEdmontonAlberta

Please speak up as my local representative who I voted for! Given the entry of the Royal Society of Canada into the fray, the Liberal government must not let this destructive project continue any further. The damage it will cause is irreversible and unjustified. Stand and be heard for the protection of our environment and aboriginal treaty's.
Do not follow the example set by the previous conservative government.

2016-05-24 20:53:26
LindsayRawlukVictoriaBritish Columbia

Dear Elected Officials:
Please respect the tenets of your office and the rights of Indigineous people by stopping Site C Dam now.

The court process could take years to resolve, especially if the federal government continues to fight against the First Nations and the landowners in these cases. Meanwhile construction of the dam continues. BC Premier Christy Clark has even said that her goal is to get the dam to “the point of no return.”

BC Hydro has to obtain permits related to continued construction of the dam from the Ministry of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard, as well as from the Ministry of Transport. They have the power to deny these permits and halt construction, which in turn would allow for a thorough assessment of the project by the BC Utilities Commission and would also allow time for the outstanding court cases by First Nations and landowners to be heard and decided upon.

The joint federal-provincial environmental impact assessment concluded that construction of the dam would severely and permanently undermine Indigenous peoples’ use of the land; harm rare plants and other biodiversity; make fishing unsafe for at least a generation; and submerge burial grounds and other crucial cultural and historical sites.

The federal and provincial approvals for the project were given on the basis of the claim that these serious, permanent harms to the environment and Indigenous culture were “justified” by the benefits of the project but they won’t provide us with any details of this ‘justification’ made behind closed doors.

“The Peace River Valley can provide fruits and vegetables for over a million people per year. Forty-four percent of the foods that can be economically grown in BC are still being imported! Fruits and vegetables are the most deficient categories of those food sources. The Peace River valley is capable of producing a variety of crops comparable to BC’s fertile Fraser Valley. As world prices for food escalate, the land BC Hydro plans to flood for Site C is our food security Plan B. Site C dam may have a 100-year life, but the agricultural land in the Peace Valley will support life in perpetuity.” – Economic agrologist Wendy Holm. BC

The Joint Review Panel was unsatisfied with the need for and the cost of the project as well as the lack of research into alternatives to Site C. The Chair of the Joint Review Panel, economist, Dr. Harry Swain took the unprecedented step of speaking out on these concerns repeatedly in the media, after the governments decided to proceed with Site C without paying heed to these key recommendations.

Additionally, Dr. Swain stated that if the government wished to proceed with Site C, then these matters of concern should be thoroughly assessed by the independent, arms-length-from-government, British Columbia Utilities Commission. The government’s response to this was to state that these particular matters of concern were actually outside the mandate of the Joint Review Panel! This issue is now before the courts!

Several leading economists from both Canada and the U.S. have determined that better and less expensive alternatives to Site C exist. Robert McCullough stated that BC Hydro used data for comparisons that was up to 5 years out of date. The cost of many renewables has come down significantly in the last year or two. Additionally, alternative projects, including geothermal would provide far more long-term jobs in various locations throughout the province and are less risky as they can be built on an as-needed basis.
BC Hydro has stated in court that the legal implications in respect to the Treaty rights of First Nations were never considered at any point in the decision-making process.

2016-05-24 21:03:39
MarkBeckReginaSaskatchewan

Dear Mr. Weir,

I urge you to use your influence to stop construction of the Site C dam. Hydro-power is far from clean and environmentally friendly. The environmental destruction that would be caused by this dam would be enormous. I understand that a major reason for building this project is to provide power for future Liquefied Natural Gas projects. Why not use the LNG to generate the power required? This would be 'reasonably' green power and certainly less destructive than the dam. I'm sure there are also other options that could be considered rather than destroying a beautiful, and increasingly rare, natural landscape such as the one that would be flooded by the Site C dam.

Please take whatever measures you can to stop construction of the dam.

Sincerely,

Mark Beck

2016-05-24 21:13:23
seanmcevoysalmon armBritish Columbia

PLease work towards stopping the development of site c dam in the Peace. Treaty infringments with first nations, environmental concerns and a general failure for to make a realistic finiancial case for development are only a few of the reasons to stop this. We need to work towards making things better and not worse for Canadians and the environment we all call home.
Thanks, Sean McEvoy

2016-05-24 21:23:54
DianeTrelenbergEdmontonAlberta

The method alone that the Federal Government uses to push thru these dams is not fair....pushing it along without being permitted, or impact assessments being done.

Please look into what is going on with this project and demand that impact assessments are done legally as stated in federal law, with First Nations people and the other landowners being involved in these statements. Environmental assessments must also be done. Fertile farmland is at a premium, and burying it under millions of gallons of water does not make sense in a province where this land is scarce.

You are who we are relying on to be the voice for these people....once this land is damned it is too late.....hear these people out.

2016-05-24 21:29:23
paulleblancvancouverBritish Columbia

Jody,

Please stop Christie Clark from proceeding with this environmentally disastrous Site C plan.

Thanks,

Paul

2016-05-24 22:05:39
ChrisEmbersonOrilliaOntario

The dam is being built in spite of First Nations objections. The environmental assessment process was flawed and ignored much of the real evidence that argued against the project.

2016-05-24 22:16:18
isabelleboisgardst-raymondQuebec

No more crimes for Earth, please !

2016-05-24 22:24:37
BeauEvansCanmoreAlberta

Federal officials repeatedly state that they can’t comment on Site C because “it’s before the courts.” Don’t let them get away with this non-answer!

The court process could take years to resolve, especially if the federal government continues to fight against the First Nations and the landowners in these cases. Meanwhile construction of the dam continues. BC Premier Christy Clark has even said that her goal is to get the dam to “the point of no return.”

BC Hydro has to obtain permits related to continued construction of the dam from the Ministry of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard, as well as from the Ministry of Transport. They have the power to deny these permits and halt construction, which in turn would allow for a thorough assessment of the project by the BC Utilities Commission and would also allow time for the outstanding court cases by First Nations and landowners to be heard and decided upon.

2016-05-24 22:26:43
AlexiaPennyNanaimoBritish Columbia

Hello Sheila,

I know you share my concerns about the whole process around the Site C dam. Please know that you have my support as my MP to speak out against this development, particularly as it affects First Nations and agricultural lands.

I urge you and Tom Mulcair to do all you can to push for the Ministry of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard and the Ministry of Transport to deny permits to BCHydro, in order to allow the time necessary for outstanding court cases to be heard and settled.

Given Chrisy Clark's commitment to seeing this project through, it is imperative that we bring all possible federal influence to bear in ensuring that this project does not go through until all concerns have been dealt with.

Thank you!
Alexia Penny

2016-05-24 23:04:26
JenniferBustinEdmontnonAlberta

Federal officials repeatedly state that they can’t comment on Site C because “it’s before the courts.” Don’t let them get away with this non-answer!

The court process could take years to resolve, especially if the federal government continues to fight against the First Nations and the landowners in these cases. Meanwhile construction of the dam continues. BC Premier Christy Clark has even said that her goal is to get the dam to “the point of no return.”

BC Hydro has to obtain permits related to continued construction of the dam from the Ministry of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard, as well as from the Ministry of Transport. They have the power to deny these permits and halt construction, which in turn would allow for a thorough assessment of the project by the BC Utilities Commission and would also allow time for the outstanding court cases by First Nations and landowners to be heard and decided upon.

The joint federal-provincial environmental impact assessment concluded that construction of the dam would severely and permanently undermine Indigenous peoples’ use of the land; harm rare plants and other biodiversity; make fishing unsafe for at least a generation; and submerge burial grounds and other crucial cultural and historical sites.

2016-05-24 23:09:48
MarkEveleighSalmon ArmBritish Columbia

Power for what??? The fracking industry.....export to USA.....Fuck that!
We need the agricultural land!

Keep the peace

2016-05-24 23:26:41
tomgrayvictoriaBritish Columbia

More Hydro Electricity is not required in British Columbia.

2016-05-25 00:03:46
MichaelBenderPort moodyBritish Columbia

Please keep our beautiful country as it is.
Thank you

2016-05-25 00:20:56
WilliamMcKeeLundBritish Columbia

I don,t believe enough time has been given to proper assessment and consultation . Please stop this project and allow the proper process to be completed.
Thank you

2016-05-25 00:27:30
DerekWestCanmoreAlberta

Why are the same environmental blunders constantly repeated by by those we trust to protect our people and our resources? The big mistakes about to occur at Site C were all made at South Indian Lake, Manitoba in the late 1960s. The science behind those mistakes was all revealed over the following decades in a series of well documented studies by respected investigatodrs. Let's not repeat the idiocy one more time. Site C development must be halted now. Read the science that is out there already and allow those with real expertise in the appropriate fields of science to address the issues. It is long past time for some fact based decisions to be made by those who do not stand to benefit from this fiasco.

Derek West BSc ( Environmental Studies)

2016-05-25 01:06:42
JennyMarcusRichmondBritish Columbia

We need to become a self sustaining province and grow our oun food. The peace river valley is so fertile and has such history. We need to be forward thinkers.. Not just greedy and in it for the money! We should be investing in sustainable resources. Please do not allow this to happen.. What about the families that have farmed the land for generations? Does that not mean anything? Thank you.

2016-05-25 01:22:22
adelecurtisvictoriaBritish Columbia

Please stand behind the many people who believe Site C dam permits should be put on hold for the continuation of legal challenges by First Nations people and land owners. Environmental issues need to be fully respected and the future needs to be a promising one for this region. Site C dam is not the best way to go. I am quite confident that you already believe this but wanted you to hear one of the voices asking for stoppage of any further development, stopping Premier Clark as she threatens to continue construction to reach the point of no return. Thank you.

2016-05-25 01:55:02
KenSifertCalgaryAlberta

We are rushing the process and all of the outstanding issues have not been settled. What is the rush. Slow down this process till everyone is heard.

2016-05-25 02:15:00
RyanLloydVancouverBritish Columbia

Ever-increasing immigration is not a viable solution; hence I don't believe we need this site.
Long term, I would like Canada to pursue smarter alternatives.

2016-05-25 02:18:58
MargaretNefsteadWhitehorseYukon

My son, Matthew Nefstead, from the Yukon is now an attorney working for the firm which represents the First Nations who are contesting the Site C dam. This project violates in spirit and in fact treaties with these Nations. It also will be an environmental disaster of enormous proportions. Taking a position against this project would be an act of great integrity. Please use your voice to speak for what is right for our Earth and its people. Thank you so very much.
Margaret Nefstead

2016-05-25 04:10:08
KennethLapointeOttawaOntario

I am against the Site C dam because it would cause too much harm to the environment.

2016-05-25 14:08:32
eileenkosiorblack diamondAlberta

Dear PM Trudeau and Ministers:

I have written several times asking you to deny the permits you hold for Site C mega dam construction. Your government's gutless non-answer that it is before the courts -- while construction continues--is shameful. ADD to that -- I hear BC and AB are "horse trading" with each other re pipelines for Site C hydro.

Will the recent and UNUSUAL letter
from The Royal Society of Canada and 250 academics
count with your government?

WIll you finally live up to YOUR COMMITMENTS (that Site C decision-making exposes in spades!):
you promised science-based policy and reconciliation with First Nations?

A sample of links that have informed me --WHAT YOU VERY WELL KNOW:

why both science and First Nations are shouting "no" to Cite C.

CPAC--Primetime

Royal Society and 250 academics talk about their letter to PM
starts just after 1:02 minutes--http://www.cpac.ca/en/programs/primetime-politics/episodes/47839150/

Royal Society of Canada, academics, call Site C dam a test for Trudeau Liberals
Bruce Cheadle | The Canadian Press May 24, 2016
http://www.timescolonist.com/royal-society-of-canada-academics-call-site-c-dam-a-test-for-trudeau-liberals-1.2261458

2016-05-25 15:56:44
SusanDraperVictoriaBritish Columbia

Where do I begin? There are so many reasons this mega-dam is not the right way forward…
- indigenous rights are being disrespected
-rare ecosystems will be damaged or destroyed
-valuable farmland with the potential to feed 1 million people will disappear
- in the age of climate change, is this a good idea?
-economically, this will be a huge cost to British Columbians
- we don't need the power
- the power generated may be used to "green" dirty fossil fuel production in the tarsands and LNG in BC.
- to invest so heavily in this one project has made it difficult for us to diversity our economy and development of alternative energy sources.
- it reflects a misunderstanding of humanity's role in the web of life. Everything is connected.

2016-05-25 16:56:58
SusanGwynne-TimothyMarsh LakeYukon

Dear Larry
I am writing to request that you do everything you can to stop the construction of Site C Dam

Reasons are (from the website):
The joint federal-provincial environmental impact assessment concluded that construction of the dam would severely and permanently undermine Indigenous peoples’ use of the land; harm rare plants and other biodiversity; make fishing unsafe for at least a generation; and submerge burial grounds and other crucial cultural and historical sites.

The federal and provincial approvals for the project were given on the basis of the claim that these serious, permanent harms to the environment and Indigenous culture were “justified” by the benefits of the project but they won’t provide us with any details of this ‘justification’ made behind closed doors.

“The Peace River Valley can provide fruits and vegetables for over a million people per year. Forty-four percent of the foods that can be economically grown in BC are still being imported! Fruits and vegetables are the most deficient categories of those food sources. The Peace River valley is capable of producing a variety of crops comparable to BC’s fertile Fraser Valley. As world prices for food escalate, the land BC Hydro plans to flood for Site C is our food security Plan B. Site C dam may have a 100-year life, but the agricultural land in the Peace Valley will support life in perpetuity.” – Economic agrologist Wendy Holm. BC

The Joint Review Panel was unsatisfied with the need for and the cost of the project as well as the lack of research into alternatives to Site C. The Chair of the Joint Review Panel, economist, Dr. Harry Swain took the unprecedented step of speaking out on these concerns repeatedly in the media, after the governments decided to proceed with Site C without paying heed to these key recommendations.

Additionally, Dr. Swain stated that if the government wished to proceed with Site C, then these matters of concern should be thoroughly assessed by the independent, arms-length-from-government, British Columbia Utilities Commission. The government’s response to this was to state that these particular matters of concern were actually outside the mandate of the Joint Review Panel! This issue is now before the courts!

Several leading economists from both Canada and the U.S. have determined that better and less expensive alternatives to Site C exist. Robert McCullough stated that BC Hydro used data for comparisons that was up to 5 years out of date. The cost of many renewables has come down significantly in the last year or two. Additionally, alternative projects, including geothermal would provide far more long-term jobs in various locations throughout the province and are less risky as they can be built on an as-needed basis.
BC Hydro has stated in court that the legal implications in respect to the Treaty rights of First Nations were never considered at any point in the decision-making process.

Please use your influence to stand against Site C dam proceeding, as well to stand for a quick switch to renewable forms of energy.
Thank you

2016-05-25 18:25:47
SusanGwynne-TimothyMarsh LakeYukon

Dear Larry
I am writing to request that you do everything you can to stop the construction of Site C Dam

Reasons are (from the website):
The joint federal-provincial environmental impact assessment concluded that construction of the dam would severely and permanently undermine Indigenous peoples’ use of the land; harm rare plants and other biodiversity; make fishing unsafe for at least a generation; and submerge burial grounds and other crucial cultural and historical sites.

The federal and provincial approvals for the project were given on the basis of the claim that these serious, permanent harms to the environment and Indigenous culture were “justified” by the benefits of the project but they won’t provide us with any details of this ‘justification’ made behind closed doors.

“The Peace River Valley can provide fruits and vegetables for over a million people per year. Forty-four percent of the foods that can be economically grown in BC are still being imported! Fruits and vegetables are the most deficient categories of those food sources. The Peace River valley is capable of producing a variety of crops comparable to BC’s fertile Fraser Valley. As world prices for food escalate, the land BC Hydro plans to flood for Site C is our food security Plan B. Site C dam may have a 100-year life, but the agricultural land in the Peace Valley will support life in perpetuity.” – Economic agrologist Wendy Holm. BC

The Joint Review Panel was unsatisfied with the need for and the cost of the project as well as the lack of research into alternatives to Site C. The Chair of the Joint Review Panel, economist, Dr. Harry Swain took the unprecedented step of speaking out on these concerns repeatedly in the media, after the governments decided to proceed with Site C without paying heed to these key recommendations.

Additionally, Dr. Swain stated that if the government wished to proceed with Site C, then these matters of concern should be thoroughly assessed by the independent, arms-length-from-government, British Columbia Utilities Commission. The government’s response to this was to state that these particular matters of concern were actually outside the mandate of the Joint Review Panel! This issue is now before the courts!

Several leading economists from both Canada and the U.S. have determined that better and less expensive alternatives to Site C exist. Robert McCullough stated that BC Hydro used data for comparisons that was up to 5 years out of date. The cost of many renewables has come down significantly in the last year or two. Additionally, alternative projects, including geothermal would provide far more long-term jobs in various locations throughout the province and are less risky as they can be built on an as-needed basis.
BC Hydro has stated in court that the legal implications in respect to the Treaty rights of First Nations were never considered at any point in the decision-making process.

Please use your influence to stand against Site C dam proceeding, as well to stand for a quick switch to renewable forms of energy.
Thank you

2016-05-25 18:25:50
CarlaMcKayChilliwackBritish Columbia

We do not want it, can't afford it and it goes against the wishes of first nations people.
This issue is before the courts. Christy Clark is pushing it through anyway.
I personally believe she should be in jail for constantly going against our needs and wishes.
Please stop sight C damm.

2016-05-25 18:58:40
TrishdundassmetcalfeOntario

Stop Site C peace River Dam construction as it is an unnecessary source of power,it is harmful to the environment, it infringes on indigenous rights and harms the ecosystem and farming age=old systems already established there. Sincerely, Trish Dundass

2016-05-25 20:13:07
Bob & MarleneAlexanderLONDONOntario

Stop this NOW !!

2016-05-25 23:52:48
DavidWaterhouseVictoriaBritish Columbia

This project should not proceed. Mr. Bennett, BC Energy Minister, stated as recently as February that BC does not need to invest in more clean energy projects because "clean energy is already in surplus" in BC. Electricity needs haven't risen in the past 8 years, he has indicated.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/bc-energy-minister-says-clean-power-projects-arent-the-priority/article28961898/

Why, then, is it ok for the BC Liberal government to push this project forward over the objections of those directly impacted, who are supposed to have been consulted for their support? Why is it okay, when climate change projections indicate there will be a worldwide diminution of available farmable land, to flood a huge area of agricultural land, doing people out of their homes, lands, and livelihoods?

This project is not necessary, and is being pushed ahead only to create the ability to advance the LNG industry, which is another undertaking that brings shame to the hypocritical BC government, who are trying to claim that LNG is a clean energy source - at least compared to coal - while ignoring the methane emissions related to fracking, and the urgency with which we need to instead transition directly to renewable clean energy, rather than another harmful fossil fuel.

If caring about the liveability of the planet for your children and other species, in the next few decades, makes you part of a "special interest group", count me in as special.

Mr Trudeau and Ms McKenna, not to mention Ms Clark, need to stop trying to talk out of both sides of their mouths on the issues of climate science. A slow phase out of fossil fuels will not be adequate to stave off looming disaster

2016-05-26 03:20:29
JanyneSinclaireNanaimoBritish Columbia

I've written previously about my concern regarding the Site C dam, and want you to know I am still opposed to this project being pushed through without proper consultation and environmental assessment being done.

I believe that this dam is not the way to meet the energy needs of British Columbia. It is an outdated method and there are now much more sustainable ways to provide power. In addition, flooding usable agricultural land is just wrong and disregarding the needs and rights of the aboriginal peoples of the area is unconscionable.

Please stand up for the people of the Peace region to stop this plan being rammed through.

2016-05-26 03:28:56
MargritBayerKelownaBritish Columbia

Dear Sir,

I'm dismayed that Site C construction is being pushed ahead in spite of all the oppositions from many British Colombians, especially the First Nations. We should be focusing on wind and sun not damming beautiful, fertile agricultural land. We do NOT NEED Site C. It will not benefit British Columbia! Let us instead be progressive and focus on none destructive alternative energy sources.

Sincerely,

Margrit Bayer

2016-05-26 03:33:07
Karen Naiman Denver Colorado

Don't let the global corporates destroy this Beautiful Treasure of God's Creation!

What will it profit Canada to gain the world and lose its soul?

2016-05-26 03:50:50
Karen Naiman Denver Colorado

Don't let the global corporates destroy this Beautiful Treasure of God's Creation!

What will it profit Canada to gain the world and lose its soul?

2016-05-26 03:51:11
LynneMcLainTaylorBritish Columbia

I grew up on the Peace River; it is my home and my favorite place in the world. My children and I are devastated at what Site C will do to our beautiful valley. This project is completely unnecessary. It contains the best farmland in the area as well as First Nations burial grounds. There are many other ways power can be created without this kind of destruction. The environmental impact is huge. I realize many people don't care about the Peace valley, and many others want the work, but for those of us who grew up here and have the Peace in our blood, it is unimaginable, unthinkable and heartbreaking.

2016-05-26 03:51:12
BarbaraIllerbrunPowell RveriBritish Columbia

I do not want the Site C dam to go through because of climate change and for the basic need for human beings to find their place on earth, meaning to find respect.
Land is not ours to take and flood to suit the needs of old political ideas of BIG projects and foreign and or domestic desires. This dam is really necessary to C Clark who wants so desperately to have her way with her LNG "BIG" dino projects. As I write she is in China selling us out. She isn't bright enough to be dealing with the Chinese. She has notright to destroy BC.
I do balme her and all those who vote for her.

I don't want to live in Alta and that is where BC will be if we follow this path of flooding and construction. BC is so much more diverse and could be developed for the future . Imagine a province in Canada that did it right!

Instead of having to look to Denmark, Norway etc. , the world could look to BC and say " they said NO" to big development projects and SHORT TERM JOB gains!
Enough is enough....CClark is determined to push this through for her warped mental needs. Please speak up and think about the LONG ROAD not political short term fantasies.

2016-05-26 03:56:01
Priscilla JuddLumbyBritish Columbia

Dear Mel Arnold MP,

I am hoping the Federal gov't stops SiteC.

The official word is that they are waiting till it goes through the court to take a position. Meanwhile, NBC Hydro has to obtain permits related to continued construction of the dam from the Ministry of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard, as well as from the Ministry of Transport. These agencies have the power to deny these permits and halt construction, which in turn would allow for a thorough assessment of the project by the BC Utilities Commission (which by law, is what should have been done but wasn't) Halting permits would also allow time for the outstanding court cases by First Nations and landowners to be heard and decided upon.

BC Hydro stated in court that the legal implications in respect to the Treaty rights of First Nations were never considered at any point in the decision-making process. That is worse than wrong - it's a violation of our charter.

I hope you will look into this and do what you can to stop this poorly organized Site C project - it's a huge mistake.

Thank you

Priscilla Judd

2016-05-26 04:00:31
JohnDafoeHalfmoon BayBritish Columbia

Keep the Peace
In 1974 I got to travel on Williston Lake Reservoir and experienced a massive log jam in Omineca Reach. At that time the elevated temperatures in the region due to the vast area of the reservoir were not unwelcome, unlike the winds. Two decades on, the Pine Beetle infestation and Global Warming prove that mega project manipulations of landscapes have repercussions over many generations. Sandstorms now blow across the lake and surrounding lands from the eroding bluffs on Peace Reach. Nearly half a century after flooding Williston Lake has not yet naturalized or stabilised. Lakeshores slump and erode, surrounding forests are still falling into the reservoir and erosion bluffs expose loose silts and sands to wind storms.
In investigating Peace Canyon Dam and Dinosaur Lake, (Peace Canyon Reservoir) in 2012 I discovered that more than 30 Km. of reservoir banks are so unstable to be dangerous to approach. These are the most stable of the Peace River banks, dammed or not.
From Ft. St. John to Hudson’s Hope the Peace River Banks are mainly soft benches of unstable clays on top of shale. This is for the entire distance of a proposed ‘Site C’ reservoir of greater than 60-70 Km. Continual landslides, erosion & slumping is guaranteed here.
The flooding of three river valleys has introduced methyl-mercury into the food chain of the Peace River from its headwaters in Williston Reservoir. For those who are sensitive to mercury poisoning no amount of fish is safe to eat in Peace River. For others willing to take a chance there is a limit to the safe amount of fish that can be ingested. Wildlife corridors, farm land, archeological sites and fossil remains are all lost flooding this valley. The Peace River estuary into Athabasca Lake is already degraded from altered flow rates from Site A and B dams.
Peace River Headwater power projects are a long way from the markets they serve. It has been estimated that 10 – 30 % of the power produced is wasted in transmission.
As a conservationist and I understand the need for sustainable energy for the future of Canada. I also understand the need for a healthy environment to support Canadians through wild fisheries, hunting and wild-craft gathering. I am aware of the services to humanity that healthy ecosystems provide at very least of clean air and water. Site C Dam proposal is never green and compromises these values.
I have been to Peace River at Hudson Hope and downriver for the past three years in support of Peace Valley Environment Association (PVEA), Mayor Gwen Johansson, West Moberly First Nations and a host of others. I am a lifetime member of PVEA.
It is a grave error to proceed with Site C Dam. End it now.
I recommend energy conservation through efficient LED lighting, reduce unnecessary consumption and small scale, individual solar voltaic generation, very successful in Germany, for the Province of B.C.
Sincerely, John Dafoe, Coastwise Guide and Consulting
8945 Redrooffs Rd., Halfmoon Bay, B.C., V0N 1Y2
e-mail: [email protected]

2016-05-26 04:01:55
CharleneSimonVictoriaBritish Columbia

Hi Murray,
I hope you are working on a way to persuade the Federal Government not to issue any more permits fir the SiteC dam project until First Nation concerns are addressed to their satisfaction and there has been a thorough and objective review of the proposal with a view to necessity, alternate energy development, environmental costs and the value of the land as a food source for British Columbians.

Many experts have objected to this project, including a firmer head of BC Hydro who has said that the power is not needed.

I am appalled at the lack of process this project has had before clearcutting, eagle nest and wildlife destruction and roadwork began.

Please tell Mr. "Sunny Ways" Trudeau that this project has nothing but dark clouds hanging over it, and could use some sunshine.

Cheers
Charlene Simon
Victoria, BC

2016-05-26 04:07:45
DouglasNikiforukGrandeur prairieAlberta

How much farm land is going to be obliterated by this damage. Where are the animals from the wetlands and forest going to go.
How can this damage be of economic value to Albertans

2016-05-26 04:56:31
MargaretKeithFarmingtonBritish Columbia

I urge your government to stop issuing permits to the Site C project immediately. It's not too late to stop this gigantic, grossly expensive project that is not needed in this decade or the next given the glut of oil and gas reserves around the world and the increasing movement to truly "Green" technologies such as solar, wind, geothermal, etc.

As proposed, Site C project will have significant and irreversible environmental, health, social, economic and heritage effects that will unjustifiably add to the industrial burden that northeastern BC
already bears. Impacts of this dam will include:

Harm to food security, crop diversity and farming communities. The Peace is a region of exceedingly good productivity, capable of growing a
broad diversity of crops and home to a rich farming community. Site C will result in the permanent loss of 6,469 hectares (15,985.25 acres) of agricultural land, 2,601 ha (6427.21) of which are Class 1 and 2 lands.

In addition to the loss above, an additional 6,290 ha, of which 343 ha are Class 1
and 2 lands, would be seriously at risk from flooding, slope instability and high
waves. We need this quality farmland in this micro-climate to produce food for the residents of Peace River Area and the residents of British Columbia.

As the value of potential agricultural lands that could be used for food production increases, the unique agricultural potential of the Peace must be prioritized. Also, preserving this land and the agricultural sector in the Peace would help protect the health of our communities, our economies and
our families.

Unjustifiable cost to ratepayers:
BC Hydro claims that the Site C Dam would cost $7.9 billion to construct, but it is widely agreed that the dam’s construction costs would increase to more than $10 billion due to the unstable ground around the dam and reservoir site. The cost
of this project would inevitably fall on the shoulders of ratepayers in the form of higher rates.

BC Hydro has not adequately assessed the environmental, economic, social, health and
heritage effects of Site C.

Many concerns have been raised by the public, First Nations, provincial and territorial governments, Environment Canada and Fisheries and Oceans Canada regarding the need to assess the downstream effects as far as the Peace-Athabasca Delta.

Thank you for considering my comments.

Regards,

Margaret Keith
#5444 - 233 Rd
Peace River Regional District, BC
V1G 0J3
Phone: 250-843-7115
e-mail: [email protected]

2016-05-26 05:20:31
TaraCullisVancouverBritish Columbia

Joyce Murray
MP, Vancouver Quadra

Dear Joyce,
I know you know the issues on Site C. You probably understand them far better than most. I just want to encourage you to do everything you can to convince your government to deny the permits to continue the construction of the Site C dam and the destruction of the Peace. As your constituent I want you to know that I and my whole household of your constituents, and all our friends, are unanimous on this one.
The cost of building the dam is incalculable -- to the local people, to growing local food in that rich valley -- the Fraser Valley of the North -- to the Y to Y initiative, to the animals, to the native culture. There is no benefit. I fear this will become known as Christie's Folly: destruction for the sake of appearing to be decisive, destruction that will last for centuries. We really have to stop it.
Please do everything you can. I know you understand.
Thank you so much.
Tara Cullis

2016-05-26 05:25:37
TaraCullisVancouverBritish Columbia

Joyce Murray
MP, Vancouver Quadra

Dear Joyce,
I know you know the issues on Site C. You probably understand them far better than most. I just want to encourage you to do everything you can to convince your government to deny the permits to continue the construction of the Site C dam and the destruction of the Peace. As your constituent I want you to know that I and my whole household of your constituents, and all our friends, are unanimous on this one.
The cost of building the dam is incalculable -- to the local people, to growing local food in that rich valley -- the Fraser Valley of the North -- to the Y to Y initiative, to the animals, to the native culture. There is no benefit. I fear this will become known as Christie's Folly: destruction for the sake of appearing to be decisive, destruction that will last for centuries. We really have to stop it.
Please do everything you can. I know you understand.
Thank you so much.
Tara Cullis

2016-05-26 05:26:18
HaroonBajwaVancouverBritish Columbia

Dear Monister

I urge you to put a stop to the Site C Dam as it will devastate the environment and infringe upon First Nations land claims.

Please do the right thing and protect this fertile and valuable land. The short sighted and anti-democratic action of the BC Government must not be rewarded.

Again, please do the right thing and put a stop to this tragedy in the making!

Sincerely,
Haroon Bajwa
Citizen of Canada
Resident of British Columbia and Native Land

2016-05-26 05:44:22
FrancesDietzVancouverBritish Columbia

The more I learn about this project, the more I don't like it.

I don't need to repeat the concerns that have been raised and will continue to be raised by opponents to this Dam.

The sheer destruction of the environment is enough for me to have issue. Is it really necessary, with all the knowledge we now have on alternative, less invasive, renewable sources of energy? So what that it's 'clean' ... but at what cost.

I am most afraid for the water. Especially at this time of severe drought and climate change, Nature left on its own is best to deal with this situation. Human tampering with clearcutting the land and altering the water flow could eventually lead to devastating effects and I really think it's unwise.

2016-05-26 05:48:48
PeggyHoman VancouverBritish Columbia

I am appalled at the outdated, short-sightedness of this unnecessary project. No respect for First Nations or the horrific irrevocable environmental damage Site C will do. Actual research data, scientists and academics know and have repeatedly said this is the wrong choice and BC will suffer the consequences forever. What is wrong with our elected officials at all levels?! I am so tired of the arrogance, ignorance and inaction of this provincial government!! And I am severely disappointed in your government for not taking a stand for the environment or First Nations on this issue. I voted for you and for the Trudeau team to make a positive difference provincially and federally - Site C requires strong leadership on First Nations and environmental issues - stand up and do the right thing to protect BC for future generations!! Your constituents and Canada's children are counting on you! Stop the permits and halt construction NOW!

2016-05-26 06:08:51
PeggyHoman VancouverBritish Columbia

I am appalled at the outdated, short-sightedness of this unnecessary project. No respect for First Nations or the horrific irrevocable environmental damage Site C will do. Actual research data, scientists and academics know and have repeatedly said this is the wrong choice and BC will suffer the consequences forever. What is wrong with our elected officials at all levels?! I am so tired of the arrogance, ignorance and inaction of this provincial government!! And I am severely disappointed in your government for not taking a stand for the environment or First Nations on this issue. I voted for you and for the Trudeau team to make a positive difference provincially and federally - Site C requires strong leadership on First Nations and environmental issues - stand up and do the right thing to protect BC for future generations!! Your constituents and Canada's children are counting on you! Stop the permits and halt construction NOW!

2016-05-26 06:08:54
PeggyHoman VancouverBritish Columbia

I am appalled at the outdated, short-sightedness of this unnecessary project. No respect for First Nations or the horrific irrevocable environmental damage Site C will do. Actual research data, scientists and academics know and have repeatedly said this is the wrong choice and BC will suffer the consequences forever. What is wrong with our elected officials at all levels?! I am so tired of the arrogance, ignorance and inaction of this provincial government!! And I am severely disappointed in your government for not taking a stand for the environment or First Nations on this issue. I voted for you and for the Trudeau team to make a positive difference provincially and federally - Site C requires strong leadership on First Nations and environmental issues - stand up and do the right thing to protect BC for future generations!! Your constituents and Canada's children are counting on you! Stop the permits and halt construction NOW!

2016-05-26 06:09:03
PeggyHoman VancouverBritish Columbia

I am appalled at the outdated, short-sightedness of this unnecessary project. No respect for First Nations or the horrific irrevocable environmental damage Site C will do. Actual research data, scientists and academics know and have repeatedly said this is the wrong choice and BC will suffer the consequences forever. What is wrong with our elected officials at all levels?! I am so tired of the arrogance, ignorance and inaction of this provincial government!! And I am severely disappointed in your government for not taking a stand for the environment or First Nations on this issue. I voted for you and for the Trudeau team to make a positive difference provincially and federally - Site C requires strong leadership on First Nations and environmental issues - stand up and do the right thing to protect BC for future generations!! Your constituents and Canada's children are counting on you! Stop the permits and halt construction NOW!

2016-05-26 06:09:06
StevenMetzgerHudson's HopeBritish Columbia

Please listen to the 250 scientists and academics who state that this project needs to be reviewed further before proceeding. There is no need for the power at the proposed completion date, so it can do no harm to make sure this is the right way to go. To destroy the Peace River Valley if it not totally necessary to do so is a crime against all citizens of BC and Canada.

2016-05-26 06:11:10
Nancy LaneMacgregorVictoriaBritish Columbia

Dear Murray Rankin,
We are all aware that Site C Dam is before the courts. But this does not stop BC Hydro. Neither does it stop false ideas to flourish about the need for the dam. This process has bypassed the Public Utilities procedure at the whim of Premier Clark. Her wish to sell LNG, to use electricity for fracking and processing, to make a deal with Alberta and swap electricity for oil pipelines, to sell off this great Peace River is the shameful bargaining of a bygone era operating today.
This valley is one of the richest agricultural areas in the country at a time when California is burning. When fossil fuels are causing this global threat is not the time for fracked gas and lost farmland. Neither is it the time for First Nations people's rights to be sacrificed for the greed of corporations. A way of life, historic sites, beauty in the land and of the land must be protected.
I urge you as my elected representative, to help us to halt this ugly thing that threatens our future. Save the Peace. Sincerely, Nancy Macgregor

2016-05-26 06:12:41
AgnesWattsVancouverBritish Columbia

Hydro not needed, except for fracking, which is also not needed.
Environmental assessments not done.
Peace Valley needed for agriculture, especially as climate changes.
Rights of indigenous people being ignored.
Dam will be huge unnecessary expense to B.C. taxpayers for decades.

2016-05-26 11:18:05
JodiHiltyCanmoreAlberta

The Royal Society of Canada just came out with a report indicating the problems of the Site C Dam. The federal government must act.

BC Hydro has to obtain permits related to continued construction of the dam from the Ministry of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard, as well as from the Ministry of Transport. They have the power to deny these permits and halt construction, which in turn would allow for a thorough assessment of the project by the BC Utilities Commission and would also allow time for the outstanding court cases by First Nations and landowners to be heard and decided upon.

The joint federal-provincial environmental impact assessment concluded that construction of the dam would severely and permanently undermine Indigenous peoples’ use of the land; harm rare plants and other biodiversity; make fishing unsafe for at least a generation; and submerge burial grounds and other crucial cultural and historical sites.

The federal and provincial approvals for the project were given on the basis of the claim that these serious, permanent harms to the environment and Indigenous culture were “justified” by the benefits of the project but they won’t provide us with any details of this ‘justification’ made behind closed doors.

Several leading economists from both Canada and the U.S. have determined that better and less expensive alternatives to Site C exist. Robert McCullough stated that BC Hydro used data for comparisons that was up to 5 years out of date. The cost of many renewables has come down significantly in the last year or two. Additionally, alternative projects, including geothermal would provide far more long-term jobs in various locations throughout the province and are less risky as they can be built on an as-needed basis.
BC Hydro has stated in court that the legal implications in respect to the Treaty rights of First Nations were never considered at any point in the decision-making process.

Please ensure that the federal government stops the Site C Dam. It is a waste of money for an ill-conceived project that will harm substantial biodiversity not to mention First Nation cultural areas and more.

Thank you-
Jodi

2016-05-26 12:35:44
JakeHodieTorontoOntario

Dear Prime Minister Trudeau,

Plain and simple.....PLEASE stop issuing permits for Site C dam!!

So many of our waters have already been ruined by development, drilling, pollution, and humans.
Enough is enough!
Our waters are supposed to be a place of peace and quiet for us, and the fish and wildlife which live in them!
The animals are running out of places to live and be safe. Our fish and wildlife are under threat from so many angles. They desperately need to be protected, mainly from humans.
Life is hard enough for people, let alone the animals.
Can't we please offer them some much needed help?!
PLEASE save the waters of the Peace RIver Valley for all future generations before they are permanently ruined. Some damage cannot be undone!

So much of our wilderness has already been ruined by mining, drilling, development, and man.
Enough is enough!
The wilderness is supposed to be a place of peace and quiet for us, and the wildlife which live in it!
The animals are running out of places to live and be safe. Our wildlife are under threat from so many angles. They desperately need to be protected, mainly from humans.
Life is hard enough for people, let alone the animals.
Can't we please offer them some much needed help?!
PLEASE save the wilderness of the Peace River Valley for all future generations before it is permanently ruined. Some damage cannot be undone!

Thank you for your time.

2016-05-26 14:10:58
CatherineGreveOsoyoosBritish Columbia

Hello Mr. Cannings,

I am opposed to the Site C Dam.

I feel that the environmental costs of this project are unjustified, that the BCUC should review the need for Site C, and that cost overruns will negatively impact British Columbians.

I am also concerned about the loss of viable farmland: food security will become increasingly important in years to come and valuable farmland will be lost if Site C goes ahead.

Please do your best to have the Federal government deny permits for Site C Dam so that the First Nations and landowners have the best possible chance to fight Site C in the courts. I think it is appalling that the project is going ahead, despite these court cases being in progress.

Thank you for your time.

Catherine Greve
Osoyoos, BC

2016-05-26 14:21:48
JoPhillipsSookeBritish Columbia

We do not need this dam.
It will destroy valuable farmland.
It will destroy crucial wildlife habitat.
It has not been properly reviewed and discussed with First Nations; totally against both human rights and promises made by Prime Minister to change the way government is treating First Nations.
It will cost way too much money.
Geothermal or solar or wind for energy is much less disruptive and cheaper.
If you cannot discuss this because it is before the courts, why is it okay to proceed with disrupting the land and people and wildlife? Is the law only applicable to BC Hydro?

2016-05-26 16:36:10
JeanettePaisleyLangleyBritish Columbia

I was delighted yesterday to hear that there are a number of academics now who are asking that there be a review of Site C dam. It comforts me to know that I am not alone in my opposition to this project.

Even though this project is before the courts, the federal government can alter a decision that was made by the previous Conservative government. The Conservative government made a mistake, and the present Liberal government can amend that. But in the meantime, while Site C is before the court, construction should be halted until the court has made a decision. What will happen when the valley has been destroyed, people's livelihoods taken away, and treaty rights ignored, and then the courts decision is that the dam should not have been begun in the first place. It is better to halt construction now until the court has made a decision.

Since BC Hydro has to obtain permits in order to continue construction of Site C, the Ministry of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard, as well as the Ministry of Transport all have the power to deny these permits and halt construction. This would allow for a thorough assessment of the project the the BC Utilities Commission and would allow time for the court cases by First Nations and landowners to be heard and decided upon.

The joint federal-provincial environmental impact assessment concluded that construction of the dam would severely and permanently undermine Indigenous peoples' use of the land; harm rare plants and other biodiversity; make fishing unsafe for a least a generation, and submerge burial grounds and other crucial cultural and historical sites. I find these conclusions alone should be enough to halt this construction until such time as a proper assessment can be made and the court has made a decision. To say that these harms are JUSTIFIED by the benefits of the project is just too outlandish a statement. How can taking away a pristine part of British Columbia, destroying the Indigenous heritage and way of live, destroying prime agricultural land, destroying wild life and wild life habitat be a justification for anything.

Economic agrologist Wendy Holm has stated: “The Peace River Valley can provide fruits and vegetables for over a million people per year. Forty-four percent of the foods that can be economically grown in BC are still being imported! Fruits and vegetables are the most deficient categories of those food sources. The Peace River valley is capable of producing a variety of crops comparable to BC’s fertile Fraser Valley. As world prices for food escalate, the land BC Hydro plans to flood for Site C is our food security Plan B. Site C dam may have a 100-year life, but the agricultural land in the Peace Valley will support life in perpetuity.”

With the current climate change on everyone's mind and the severe droughts in California, how can the BC government and the Canadian government justify destroying a crucial agricultural area that will be able to supply food for Canadians?

There is much that has been written about the folly of destroying the Peace Valley. I do most sincerely urge you to read this and decide for yourself whether destroying the Peace Valley is in anyone's best interests.

I read in today's issue of The Vancouver Sun that, "The number of US jobs in solar energy overtook those in oil and natural gas extraction for the first time last year, helping drive a global surge in employment in the clean-energy business as fossil-fuel companies faltered."

Surely, it would be prudent for BC and Canada to invest in this growing industry, rather than spend million of dollars on outdated models. I have heard that BC needs Site C to help with its LNG development. As it sits at the moment LNG development seems to be dead in the water. The world seems to be flooded with LNG and BC has come very late to that party. It seems to me that BC and Canada could and should invest the capital being planned for Site C in developing cleaner and safer renewable energy. This development could be a boon for employment as, "Employment in the US solar business grew 12 times faster than overall job creation."

Taking all the above into consideration it would appear that construction of Site C should be halted immediately. We may have a chance to save the Peace Valley for future generations for recreational enjoyment, as well as food security. So much is dependent on this decision and I urge you to do your level best to stop this disaster before it is too late. It is not too late today, but it might be tomorrow and for all our tomorrows.

2016-05-26 17:22:23
JeanettePaisleyLangleyBritish Columbia

I was delighted yesterday to hear that there are a number of academics now who are asking that there be a review of Site C dam. It comforts me to know that I am not alone in my opposition to this project.

Even though this project is before the courts, the federal government can alter a decision that was made by the previous Conservative government. The Conservative government made a mistake, and the present Liberal government can amend that. But in the meantime, while Site C is before the court, construction should be halted until the court has made a decision. What will happen when the valley has been destroyed, people's livelihoods taken away, and treaty rights ignored, and then the courts decision is that the dam should not have been begun in the first place. It is better to halt construction now until the court has made a decision.

Since BC Hydro has to obtain permits in order to continue construction of Site C, the Ministry of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard, as well as the Ministry of Transport all have the power to deny these permits and halt construction. This would allow for a thorough assessment of the project the the BC Utilities Commission and would allow time for the court cases by First Nations and landowners to be heard and decided upon.

The joint federal-provincial environmental impact assessment concluded that construction of the dam would severely and permanently undermine Indigenous peoples' use of the land; harm rare plants and other biodiversity; make fishing unsafe for a least a generation, and submerge burial grounds and other crucial cultural and historical sites. I find these conclusions alone should be enough to halt this construction until such time as a proper assessment can be made and the court has made a decision. To say that these harms are JUSTIFIED by the benefits of the project is just too outlandish a statement. How can taking away a pristine part of British Columbia, destroying the Indigenous heritage and way of live, destroying prime agricultural land, destroying wild life and wild life habitat be a justification for anything.

Economic agrologist Wendy Holm has stated: “The Peace River Valley can provide fruits and vegetables for over a million people per year. Forty-four percent of the foods that can be economically grown in BC are still being imported! Fruits and vegetables are the most deficient categories of those food sources. The Peace River valley is capable of producing a variety of crops comparable to BC’s fertile Fraser Valley. As world prices for food escalate, the land BC Hydro plans to flood for Site C is our food security Plan B. Site C dam may have a 100-year life, but the agricultural land in the Peace Valley will support life in perpetuity.”

With the current climate change on everyone's mind and the severe droughts in California, how can the BC government and the Canadian government justify destroying a crucial agricultural area that will be able to supply food for Canadians?

There is much that has been written about the folly of destroying the Peace Valley. I do most sincerely urge you to read this and decide for yourself whether destroying the Peace Valley is in anyone's best interests.

I read in today's issue of The Vancouver Sun that, "The number of US jobs in solar energy overtook those in oil and natural gas extraction for the first time last year, helping drive a global surge in employment in the clean-energy business as fossil-fuel companies faltered."

Surely, it would be prudent for BC and Canada to invest in this growing industry, rather than spend million of dollars on outdated models. I have heard that BC needs Site C to help with its LNG development. As it sits at the moment LNG development seems to be dead in the water. The world seems to be flooded with LNG and BC has come very late to that party. It seems to me that BC and Canada could and should invest the capital being planned for Site C in developing cleaner and safer renewable energy. This development could be a boon for employment as, "Employment in the US solar business grew 12 times faster than overall job creation."

Taking all the above into consideration it would appear that construction of Site C should be halted immediately. We may have a chance to save the Peace Valley for future generations for recreational enjoyment, as well as food security. So much is dependent on this decision and I urge you to do your level best to stop this disaster before it is too late. It is not too late today, but it might be tomorrow and for all our tomorrows.

2016-05-26 17:23:49
DorothyNelsonVancouverBritish Columbia

Dear Minister Murray,
Knowing your record of concern for and diligence in protecting British Columbia's natural resources, I urge you to extend your influence to stop the unnecessary and misguided Site C dam.

If the Ministry of Fisheries, Oceans, the Canadian Coast Guard and the Ministry of Transport deny permits to continue construction of the dam, it can still be halted.

The joint federal-provincial environmental impact assessment concluded that construction of the dam would severely and permanently undermine Indigenous peoples' use of the land. That is not all; far-sighted politicians like yourself must recognize the long-term value of food-producing areas like the Peace. Imports are dependent on preventing climate change/warming/drought in California for instance, so not reliable.

Also, justification for damming the Peace is questionable.

Thank you for your attention,
Dorothy Nelson

2016-05-26 17:38:23
KirstenPedersenFort St. JohnBritish Columbia

Dear Pat Pimm:

Dear Prime Minister,
I am writing regarding the Site C hydroelectric dam project on the Peace River in northern British Columbia. A group
of Canadian scholars, including several members of the Royal Society of Canada, have raised serious concerns
regarding the process used for approval (see www.sitecstatement.org). As President of the Royal Society, I am in
agreement with the key issues they raise.
Although the Site C Project has received provincial and federal regulatory approval (including some of the necessary
permits), the Royal Society of Canada is deeply concerned about how that approval was achieved. Indeed, project
approval goes against the Canadian government emphasis on evidence-based decision-making and how it must shape
and inform government action. The three-person Joint Review Panel, established by the two levels of government,
appears to have been streamlined in order to expedite review of the Site C project; it had to work under a short time
frame with limited resources and powers, and was consequently challenged in providing a thorough and
comprehensive review of the project. Even then, the Joint Review Panel identified a number of environmental issues
that beg further consideration under the federal Environmental Assessment Act and Clean Energy Act.
It is also curious why a project of this scope and nature was not assessed by the British Columbia Utilities
Commission. That should have been a priority. Why did the BC legislature pass an act to prevent this essential
review? This failure to subject the project to rigorous scrutiny raises serious questions about whether the project
should proceed until such time as a more thorough review is undertaken.
Equally troubling is the fact that the Site C Project is proceeding even though there are outstanding First Nations
treaty and Aboriginal rights to be resolved. Past projects often neglected or ignored Aboriginal peoples and their
concerns–with adverse and lingering consequences. Those days are supposed to be over. Both the federal and British
Columbian governments have made a public and solemn commitment not only to consult Aboriginal peoples in a
meaningful and substantive way, but also recognize and address their fundamental rights and interests.
Why, then, were these rights and interests apparently not considered during the Joint Panel Review, and if they were,
where is that part of the report? And why is construction underway when these matters are still to be addressed by the
courts in two First Nations cases? That in itself would seem to be an infringement of Aboriginal interests. It also
undermines all the goodwill over the past few years towards accommodation and reconciliation. That is not the
blueprint for Canada in the twenty-first century, especially given Canada's recent decision to support the United
Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Work on the Site C project should be discontinued for this
reason alone.
…/2
   
I realize that the Site C Project has received federal cabinet approval through an order-in-council. But that does not mean that the
Canadian and British Columbian governments cannot step back from the project: first, to ensure a comprehensive regulatory
review and assessment process; and secondly, to address First Nations treaty and Aboriginal rights as required by recent court
decisions.
As Prime Minister Justin Trudeau recently told Indigenous youth at Oskayak High School in Saskatoon in late April, “we have to
be responsible around the environment, we have to respect concerns that communities have and we have to build partnerships with
indigenous people.” (Saskatoon Star Phoenix, 28 April 2016, p. A7). The Site C Project must be held to these standards.
Yours sincerely,

Kirsten Pedersen

2016-05-26 21:19:42
KirstenPedersenFort St. JohnBritish Columbia

Dear Pat Pimm:

Dear Prime Minister,
I am writing regarding the Site C hydroelectric dam project on the Peace River in northern British Columbia. A group
of Canadian scholars, including several members of the Royal Society of Canada, have raised serious concerns
regarding the process used for approval (see www.sitecstatement.org). As President of the Royal Society, I am in
agreement with the key issues they raise.
Although the Site C Project has received provincial and federal regulatory approval (including some of the necessary
permits), the Royal Society of Canada is deeply concerned about how that approval was achieved. Indeed, project
approval goes against the Canadian government emphasis on evidence-based decision-making and how it must shape
and inform government action. The three-person Joint Review Panel, established by the two levels of government,
appears to have been streamlined in order to expedite review of the Site C project; it had to work under a short time
frame with limited resources and powers, and was consequently challenged in providing a thorough and
comprehensive review of the project. Even then, the Joint Review Panel identified a number of environmental issues
that beg further consideration under the federal Environmental Assessment Act and Clean Energy Act.
It is also curious why a project of this scope and nature was not assessed by the British Columbia Utilities
Commission. That should have been a priority. Why did the BC legislature pass an act to prevent this essential
review? This failure to subject the project to rigorous scrutiny raises serious questions about whether the project
should proceed until such time as a more thorough review is undertaken.
Equally troubling is the fact that the Site C Project is proceeding even though there are outstanding First Nations
treaty and Aboriginal rights to be resolved. Past projects often neglected or ignored Aboriginal peoples and their
concerns–with adverse and lingering consequences. Those days are supposed to be over. Both the federal and British
Columbian governments have made a public and solemn commitment not only to consult Aboriginal peoples in a
meaningful and substantive way, but also recognize and address their fundamental rights and interests.
Why, then, were these rights and interests apparently not considered during the Joint Panel Review, and if they were,
where is that part of the report? And why is construction underway when these matters are still to be addressed by the
courts in two First Nations cases? That in itself would seem to be an infringement of Aboriginal interests. It also
undermines all the goodwill over the past few years towards accommodation and reconciliation. That is not the
blueprint for Canada in the twenty-first century, especially given Canada's recent decision to support the United
Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Work on the Site C project should be discontinued for this
reason alone.
…/2
   
I realize that the Site C Project has received federal cabinet approval through an order-in-council. But that does not mean that the
Canadian and British Columbian governments cannot step back from the project: first, to ensure a comprehensive regulatory
review and assessment process; and secondly, to address First Nations treaty and Aboriginal rights as required by recent court
decisions.
As Prime Minister Justin Trudeau recently told Indigenous youth at Oskayak High School in Saskatoon in late April, “we have to
be responsible around the environment, we have to respect concerns that communities have and we have to build partnerships with
indigenous people.” (Saskatoon Star Phoenix, 28 April 2016, p. A7). The Site C Project must be held to these standards.
Yours sincerely,

Kirsten Pedersen

2016-05-26 21:21:24
JimPineVictoria, B.C.British Columbia

Dear Elizabeth,
I have written to you before about the folly of building the Site C dam. You know all of the reasons from loss of agricultural land, to respecting native land claims, to the public subsidizing the LNG industry to cheaper sources of electrical generation.
Please do what you can to stop this and please forward to anyone you think can be in a position to stop this.
Thank you.

Jim

2016-05-26 21:21:40
AnneFredetteSookeBritish Columbia

Makes no financial sense!! Will burden BC citizens for generations. Energy is not currently needed and more economical and cleaner ie thermal, wind sources are available. Dams are old technology and not green at all. Also this area has great clean farm land able to provide food security. There are many other reasons to not build this dam and I can not see one good reason to build it.

2016-05-26 21:21:51
alberthaddadconcordOntario

We must think of the future

2016-05-26 21:23:08
BLeeTorontoOntario

First Nations people's have been screwed out of enough things in their history with European based Canadians. It needs to stop. Stop telling them that they have no say in when it comes to their land.

2016-05-26 21:25:52
WendyProtheroComoxBritish Columbia

I can't believe that this project will be allowed to proceed. As an retired farmer I realize what valuable land will be flooded. We are talking class one soils which will only become more valuable in the generations to come.Also we are to respect the First Nations heritage on these lands used for many generations before European settlement. The other issue is the amount of greenhouse gases which will be released, for every ton of cement a tone of co2 is released to say nothing of the degradation of the land. I am so hoping my new Liberal government will respond to science and sensitivity do the right thing and say "No to site c"! Thanks for hearing me. Yours truly, Wendy Prothero

2016-05-26 21:33:28
JoanneOlafsonEdmontonAlberta

The construction of the Site C dam must stop, long before "the point of no return"; the BC government has no moral or legal right to continue with construction.

The federal government, on behalf of all Canadians, needs to reject or at least put construction permits on hold.

There must be consuItations and discussions with all Canadians about this dam, especially First Nations and other landowners and residents of the proposed area of flooding.

2016-05-26 21:38:49
ElizabethKeenanTorontoOntario

“The Peace River Valley can provide fruits and vegetables for over a million people per year. Forty-four percent of the foods that can be economically grown in BC are still being imported! Fruits and vegetables are the most deficient categories of those food sources. The Peace River valley is capable of producing a variety of crops comparable to BC’s fertile Fraser Valley. As world prices for food escalate, the land BC Hydro plans to flood for Site C is our food security Plan B. Site C dam may have a 100-year life, but the agricultural land in the Peace Valley will support life in perpetuity.” – Economic agrologist Wendy Holm. BC

BC Hydro has to obtain permits related to continued construction of the dam from the Ministry of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard, as well as from the Ministry of Transport. They have the power to deny these permits and halt construction, which in turn would allow for a thorough assessment of the project by the BC Utilities Commission and would also allow time for the outstanding court cases by First Nations and landowners to be heard and decided upon.

PLease take note of this . Finances aren't everything!

2016-05-26 21:39:14
LiseJohnsonVictoriaBritish Columbia

Please, oh, please -- action must be taken to stop the Site C dam before it gets to "the point of no return"! I have so many concerns about the Site C dam that I don't know where to start. First of all, that area is about to become the breadbasket of B.C., or even Western Canada. It is stunning land. Secondly, we do NOT need the energy it will produce...and we certainly don't need it when it is on the backs of the people and the land of this beautiful region. Thirdly, First Nations treaty and Aboriginal rights must be addressed, as required by recent court decisions.
Please push the Federal Government to step in and do everything possible to stop this shameful and unnecessary project.
Thank you.

2016-05-26 22:02:10
KatherineMaasVictoriaBritish Columbia

Please do everything you can to stop the government from issuing permits related to the construction of the proposed Site C Dam.

This dam is not needed and is damaging some of the best farmland in BC, just when we need to be most concerned about food security in this province; the drought in California has already driven up food prices here and this problem will only grow bigger as climate change progresses.

We don't need the power. We already have more than enough hydro electric power in this province.

Construction of this dam will severely and permanently undermine First Nations' use of the land, harm rare plants, threaten biodiversity, make fishing unsafe for at least a generation, and submerge Aboriginal burial grounds and other cultural sites.

The cost of this dam is going to be astronimical and will saddle British Columbians with billions of dollars in debt that our children and grandchildren will be paying for. Better and less expensive alternatives to Site C exist. The data BC Hydro used data for comparisons that was up to 5 years out of date. Meanwhile, the cost of many other renewables has come down significantly in the last year or two. Alternative projects, such as geothermal, would provide far more long-term jobs in various locations throughout the province and are less risky as they can be built on an as-needed basis.

2016-05-26 22:05:03
ConradDombrowskiWhaletownBritish Columbia

I'm concerned about yet another development project sanctioned by the Canadian government that breaches trust, breaks the law, and ignores the rights of Indigenous people. Haven't we learned our lessons from the past that energy grabs and inadequately reviewed development projects are simply not worth the human rights abuses that accompany so many of them?

This is 2016, it's way past time to wake up to the realities of the impacts on such projects on people and to make an effort to adhere to both Canadian and International law. Site C dam simply cannot be allowed to proceed without meaningful and legitimate consultation with the First Nations involved.

Sincerely,
Conrad Dombrowski

2016-05-26 22:12:06
GudrunLeysVictoriaBritish Columbia

Hi Murray,

As your supporter and your constituent in Victoria I so much hope that you will actively work to impress on the Liberal government that they revisit the decision re the Site C Dam. The Royal Society has today come out to request a renewed look at the last government's decision as that government did not follow the proper procedures in approving the dam.

We BC residents don't need the dam; the electricity generated from it is simply to be sold to the US or to be used for questionable LNG projects. We residents And esp. the First Nations (who have not given their assent to this hugely costly project) are the ones who will bear the financial cost and the environmental destruction for all future.

Please, Murray, help us do all we can to protect our land and the livelihoods of the people who occupy it. Shame on us if we sell out our beautiful and valuable land simply so that industry can profit from it when we the population don't need a dam. Please press Mr. Trudeau to revoke the permits which have already been issued. It can be done and shall be done.
I count on you, Murray, to stand up with us against the creation of the Site C Dam.

With kind regards
Gudrun Leys

2016-05-26 22:14:06
sheila o'byrnevictoriaBritish Columbia

Dear Mr. Rankin... please help our environment and stop Site C... have a look at this beautiful video... it touched my heart...

http://realsitechearings.org

thank you, sheila

2016-05-26 22:15:00
louisebourassavictoriaBritish Columbia

Dear Sir/Madam:

The Site C dam is not needed in BC to create more energy. The construction of the Site will undermined the use of the land by Indigenous people; harm plants and other biodiversity; make fishing unsafe for a generation. We are at a cross road to put energy into more alternative diversity. The flooding of lands does not make sense anymore. This project is big and unnecessary, will not support the energy progress of BC. We need the land and grow food - the Peace River valley can provide food for millions of people and with price of food going up and most food imported, we need to think of the best use of the land. BC can provide food for thousands of people on this land - lets keep it .

2016-05-26 22:19:19
louisebourassavictoriaBritish Columbia

Dear Sir/Madam:

The Site C dam is not needed in BC to create more energy. The construction of the Site will undermined the use of the land by Indigenous people; harm plants and other biodiversity; make fishing unsafe for a generation. We are at a cross road to put energy into more alternative diversity. The flooding of lands does not make sense anymore. This project is big and unnecessary, will not support the energy progress of BC. We need the land and grow food - the Peace River valley can provide food for millions of people and with price of food going up and most food imported, we need to think of the best use of the land. BC can provide food for thousands of people on this land - lets keep it .

2016-05-26 22:20:00
Anne Languedoc Garibaldi Highlands British Columbia

Dear Ms. Goldsmith-Jones,

I have many concerns regarding the development of the Site C dam on the Peace River, British Columbia.

I would like the Federal government to stop issuing environmental and transport permits for the work until all the various legal challenges are resolved. This is the most prudent and just approach given the current court challenges by the Treaty 8 First Nations. The Liberal government is on record for taking a brave stance at the UN with respect to the rights of the indigenous people of Canada. Please remember this commitment in the context of the Site C dam and its future impact.

I had an opportunity to see first hand the area in question in March 2016. I was deeply moved by the potential loss this questionable project will create on so many levels. Your government is in a position of leadership and can make a real difference in the outcome.

This is not just a local issue. This will affect all Canadians. It is my opinion that what happens on the Peace River in the coming months will go down in the history of Canada. Please help make it positive by allowing more time and further review of the cost/benefit analysis for this project. This further review is desperately needed to make sure we are doing the right thing for all future generations. This is the number one duty of our Federal government.

Sincerely,

Anne Languedoc
1010 Tobermory Way
Squamish, British Columbia
V0N 1T0

2016-05-26 22:22:32
WENDYTAYLOR BurnabyBritish Columbia

The joint federal-provincial environmental impact assessment concluded that construction of the dam would severely and permanently undermine Indigenous peoples’ use of the land; harm rare plants and other biodiversity; make fishing unsafe for at least a generation; and submerge burial grounds and other crucial cultural and historical sites.

BC Hydro has to obtain permits related to continued construction of the dam from the Ministry of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard, as well as from the Ministry of Transport. They have the power to deny these permits and halt construction, which in turn would allow for a thorough assessment of the project by the BC Utilities Commission and would also allow time for the outstanding court cases by First Nations and landowners to be heard and decided upon.

“The Peace River Valley can provide fruits and vegetables for over a million people per year. Forty-four percent of the foods that can be economically grown in BC are still being imported! Fruits and vegetables are the most deficient categories of those food sources. The Peace River valley is capable of producing a variety of crops comparable to BC’s fertile Fraser Valley. As world prices for food escalate, the land BC Hydro plans to flood for Site C is our food security Plan B. Site C dam may have a 100-year life, but the agricultural land in the Peace Valley will support life in perpetuity.” – Economic agrologist Wendy Holm. BC

The Joint Review Panel was unsatisfied with the need for and the cost of the project as well as the lack of research into alternatives to Site C. The Chair of the Joint Review Panel, economist, Dr. Harry Swain took the unprecedented step of speaking out on these concerns repeatedly in the media, after the governments decided to proceed with Site C without paying heed to these key recommendations.

Additionally, Dr. Swain stated that if the government wished to proceed with Site C, then these matters of concern should be thoroughly assessed by the independent, arms-length-from-government, British Columbia Utilities Commission. The government’s response to this was to state that these particular matters of concern were actually outside the mandate of the Joint Review Panel! This issue is now before the courts!

Several leading economists from both Canada and the U.S. have determined that better and less expensive alternatives to Site C exist. Robert McCullough stated that BC Hydro used data for comparisons that was up to 5 years out of date. The cost of many renewables has come down significantly in the last year or two. Additionally, alternative projects, including geothermal would provide far more long-term jobs in various locations throughout the province and are less risky as they can be built on an as-needed basis.
BC Hydro has stated in court that the legal implications in respect to the Treaty rights of First Nations were never considered at any point in the decision-making process.

WE UNDERSTAND, MR. STEWART, THAT YOU ARE A FEDERAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR OUR RIDING IN BURNABY SOUTH. THERE IS NOTHING THAT IS TRULY WORTHWHILE TO WHICH YOU HAVE CONTRIBUTED SINCE YOUR ELECTION. NOTHING. AND UNLESS YOU START OF UNDERSTAND THE IMPACT THIS WILL HAVE ON US ALL, YOU NEVER WILL.

2016-05-26 22:40:23
RonGibsonNorth VancouverBritish Columbia

Not needed,floods an important valley that is used for food production. Waste of billions of dollars that can be spent more wisely. Health care, seniors, homeless, it goes on and on.

2016-05-26 22:45:06
AliceKiddLillooetBritish Columbia

I am concerned about Site C for many reasons:
Firstly the failure of due process. Inadequate scientific assessment, and consultation with First Nations.
Secondly, it is not easy to make decisions in this new era of climate change consciousness. All hydro power is not green. This massive dam with all its concrete, etc. is not a green project. Bu the time it is built it will take decades before the power is emissions free,
Thirdly, we are going to need all the local (BC) agricultural land we can get. Looking at the Peace from the view of industrial agriculture you don't really understand how much we can grow there. Save the Peace for the food.
Thanks you for listening
Alice Kidd

2016-05-26 22:55:44
UteWarkentinVancouverBritish Columbia

Loss of farmland
Loss of ecosystems
Disregard for First Nations
Climate Change

2016-05-26 23:00:29
JanHalvarsonVancouverBritish Columbia

The Site C dam is being built to provide energy for LNG fracking that is totally destructive to land, water, air and the environment and will destroy enough agricultural land to feed a million people. BC currently imports over 60% of our food mostly from drought stricken California. The world has lost 1/3 of arable land due to Climate Change. Please stop the unnecessary Site C dam so we and future generations will have a safe environment and food to eat.

2016-05-26 23:31:12
MarilynGoodeVictoriaBritish Columbia

In a time when we are trying to address the effects of Climate Change we need to say NO to Site c damn. It is mainly being built to fuel the LNG industry which doesn't seem to be taking off at the moment and hopefully won't. The Site c damn would flood tons of agriculture land which can be used for food production. It will also affect many farmers and ranchers in the area taking away their livelyhood which is unfair and unjust. It would also disrespect the rights of Indigenous peoples in the area. Alternative forms of energy like geothermal could provide more jobs than the Site C damn. Please STOP the Site C damn for our children and our children's children!!

2016-05-26 23:41:02
LavernJensenStony PlainAlberta

Dear Rona Ambrose
MP, Parkland County,

I am truly concerned, as are thousands of others regarding the proposed building of the Site C dam.

So much beautiful flora and fauna will be destroyed, never to be the same again.

They DO NOT need this dam. It will be a tremendous and total waste of millions of dollars.

Please do what you can to prevent the construction of Site C dam.

Yours truly,
Lavern Jensen

2016-05-26 23:53:27
OliverLammTorontoOntario

It is simply gobsmacking what a bunch of crooks you liberals have become.
Site c project is so profoundly asinine it begs words.
You are no different from Harper.
Thanks for nothing.

2016-05-26 23:56:12
JaniceWilsonNorth VancouverBritish Columbia

Permits necessary for the continued construction of the Site C dam will be coming before the Federal government in the coming weeks.

In light of the controversial nature of this development, both economically, environmentally, and regarding First Nation's rights, I urge you to oppose the granting of any permits.

Scientists continue to oppose this ill-advised destructive project and I hope the federal liberals will do the right thing.

2016-05-27 00:00:24
SheilaPaulShawnigan LakeBritish Columbia

We, Canada, and British Columbia, do not need this power. Why are we going to decimate all this sacred land, water, lives, and much more - for someone else to gain? There is sooo much more to say.

2016-05-27 00:00:53
PaulineHousdenVictoriaBritish Columbia

Dear Sir,
You are an environmentalist of note and I urge you to consider opposing this massive and permanent disruption to The Peace River watershed and wild habitat.
Bit by bit wild Canada, admired by over developed countries, is being being destroyed.
Most appreciative of your efforts to protect this wilderness

Sincerely,
Pauline Housden

2016-05-27 00:02:35
SandraNelkenNelsonBritish Columbia

I am concerned about the cultural, social and environmental injustice of the proposed Site C Dam. Hundreds of acres of fertile farmland will be flooded; many farmers will lose their livelihood; and Indigenous Rights will be ignored.

Please see that this project will not go forward.

2016-05-27 00:05:31
MarittaKosonenCoquitlamBritish Columbia

Mr. Donnelly, Destroying important agricultural land at a time when we do not know the future impact of global warming on our planet is clearly a devastating decision. Not only are Indigenous peoples rights to this land undermined by harming rare plants and making fishing unsafe not to mention burial grounds and historical sites gone forever. This government has no right to dam this pristine and beautiful land.
This issue is now before the courts and I urge you Mr. Donnelly to help protect this beautiful piece of British Columbia for future generations.

2016-05-27 00:09:24
RichardPearsonVictoriaBritish Columbia

It is another example of our habit of wanting more consumption when we need to use sustainable resources.
We need to move away from our self destruction.

2016-05-27 00:27:15
JoanWarrenVancouverBritish Columbia

The choice between producing our own food and having more electricity to sell to the States, makes the decision really clear on why Site C is not needed.

2016-05-27 00:38:25
GailNewman Roberts Creek British Columbia

Plese do not flood the peace river islands we do not need the power

2016-05-27 00:42:26
Janet Christine ElseyNorth VanouverBritish Columbia

I ask you to speak up against Site C for many reasons. 1) It will destroy countless hectares of our best agriculture land needed to grow food (especially in the event of food shortage from CA.)
2) It is an unnecessary cost to BC citizens.
3) It is not needed for fracking as fracking is not cost effective and is bad for the earth (seismic activity) and for drinking water.

2016-05-27 00:42:39
ErinMazeKamloopsBritish Columbia

I am completely opposed to the Site C dam project. Flooding prime agricultural land is short sighted at best. The provincial government has completely ignored the will of the people and the concerns of the scientists and First Nations regarding this project. I support the First Nations claims to their traditional territory. I believe the land will be much better cared for under their stewardship. Cathy McLeod, please represent my interests and the interests of MANY of you constituents in the Kamloops riding and prevent this project from moving ahead.

2016-05-27 00:49:38
ErnaRobertsonSalt Spring IslandBritish Columbia

The joint federal-provincial environmental impact assessment concluded that construction of the dam would severely and permanently undermine Indigenous peoples’ use of the land; harm rare plants and other biodiversity; make fishing unsafe for at least a generation; and submerge burial grounds and other crucial cultural and historical sites.
“The Peace River Valley can provide fruits and vegetables for over a million people per year. Forty-four percent of the foods that can be economically grown in BC are still being imported! Fruits and vegetables are the most deficient categories of those food sources. The Peace River valley is capable of producing a variety of crops comparable to BC’s fertile Fraser Valley. As world prices for food escalate, the land BC Hydro plans to flood for Site C is our food security Plan B. Site C dam may have a 100-year life, but the agricultural land in the Peace Valley will support life in perpetuity.” – Economic agrologist Wendy Holm. BC
The Joint Review Panel was unsatisfied with the need for and the cost of the project as well as the lack of research into alternatives to Site C. The Chair of the Joint Review Panel, economist, Dr. Harry Swain took the unprecedented step of speaking out on these concerns repeatedly in the media, after the governments decided to proceed with Site C without paying heed to these key recommendations.

The Site C Dam should not proceed!

2016-05-27 01:17:55
eswarwickvictoriaBritish Columbia

SITE C NEEDS TO BE DROPPED! PLEASE make a difference and halt this project by ensuring that federal government departments do not issue the permits necessary for continued construction.
We cannot base our future on FRACKING!!!! Between ruining our pristine water…a resource far more valuable and necessary than fossil fuel and earthquakes from tracking, it's time to think outside the box. Natural gas is NOT GREEN!!!
All the beautiful agricultural land slated to be decimated is also a tragic loss.

PLEASE STOP THIS MADNESS!!!

2016-05-27 01:20:09
lilisoleil GarbuttSidney B.C/British Columbia

thank youfor helping stop the site C dam. It seems we are always fighting for something, This is such a tragidy that money talks, Do what you can.

2016-05-27 01:26:17
QueenlyLeeVancouverBritish Columbia

Dear Mr. Davis

Please vote against all developments of Site C Dam!

Thank you for your great work!

2016-05-27 01:28:24
MoniqueLeungTorontoOntario

Dear Mr. Tan

Please vote against all developments on Site C Dam!

Thank you!

2016-05-27 01:30:55
MurrayGoodeVictoriaBritish Columbia

I am outraged that this dam will flood over thirty thousand acres of farmland! Less than three percent of our province is arable, and almost half of the fruits and vegetables consumed in BC currently come from California. It makes no sense environmentally, or economically, to make us more dependent on food imports.

The dam would also flood over seventeen thousand acres of forest which act as a carbon sink.

Murray Goode

2016-05-27 01:34:01
IrinaIvanovaNorth YorkOntario

Dear Mr. Ehasassi:
I am deeply concerned about Site C project in BC primarily because as a Canadian I firmly believe we should rely on our own food. And Site C will be flooding primary agricultural land. I was born in Russia and I know how often senseless flooding for hydro needs brought nothing but trouble in the long run, not only displacing people and loosing growing land, but also altering climate.
Also, how can any project proceed if there are matters in court still? What if the court would rule in favour of First Nation, will the dam be demolished?
The federal and provincial approvals for the project were given on the basis of the claim that these serious, permanent harms to the environment and Indigenous culture were “justified” by the benefits of the project but they won’t provide us with any details of this ‘justification’ made behind closed doors.
We elect politicians to serve people and there is a large group of canadians strongly opposed to this project, shouldn't they be listened to? Why are they're no petitions or rallies FOR Site C? If it were that important and would create so many jobs people would be out there, somehow they're not.
Please kindly respond to me how are you addressing this concern?
THank you,
Irina

2016-05-27 01:46:29
MirandaWilliamsArmstrongBritish Columbia

The power is not needed
Flooding good farm land when we need farm land
Impact on the animals
Putting people, whether native or otherwise, out of their homes.

2016-05-27 02:05:24
BetteMclennanWilliams LakeBritish Columbia

We do not need this dam. Use the $ to build infastructure for other alternate energy that will get us off the fossil fuel dependence. Why give our power away to the US, in particular when we have an excess?

2016-05-27 02:27:05
ConnerWrightCawstonBritish Columbia

Hi Mr.Albas,
I am concerned about the Site C Dam.
I've heard a lot of criticism about the project, and I do not agree that it should proceed.
I think that land should be used to create produce and help safe guard the species that live there. Among man other more " balanced " approaches to the environment.
I can go on about the needs of Canada and how obvious certain things are about my opinion... But I would sincerely hope that you are getting the same information about the project as I am ( David Suzuki ).
I appreciate your time,
Sincerely

2016-05-27 02:42:15
Peter @ MargaretHarsheninKelowna British Columbia

B.C. has such limited agricultural land overall (2 to 3%) that you would destroy the future Canadian generations their ability to feed themselves.

2016-05-27 03:00:05
AndreaLeeRichmondBritish Columbia

The federal government has the power to deny the permits and halt the construction of the Site C Dam, thereby allowing for a thorough assessment of the project by the BC Utilities Commission and would also allow time for the outstanding court cases by First Nations and landowners to be heard and decided upon.
The joint federal-provincial environmental impact assessment concluded that construction of the dam would severely and permanently undermine Indigenous peoples' use of the land; harm rare plants and other biodiversity; make fishing unsafe for at least a generation; and submerge burial grounds and other crucial cultrual and historical sites.

2016-05-27 03:08:24
YvonnePeddemorsLangleyBritish Columbia

This is a project without insight to our future generations.
We need sustainable renewable energy like wind and solar, dams, gas, and oil are old school thinking!

Please consider pressure towards rethinking our world for our future generations!

2016-05-27 03:13:57
KeithMayoOrangevilleOntario

Dear Mr. Tilson,

Please add your voice to stop the continued destruction of priceless habitat, landscapes, homes and aboriginal lands that the Site C dam project in BC will generate.

The joint federal-provincial environmental impact assessment concluded that construction of the dam would severely and permanently undermine Indigenous peoples’ use of the land; harm rare plants and other biodiversity; make fishing unsafe for at least a generation; and submerge burial grounds and other crucial cultural and historical sites.

"The Peace River Valley can provide fruits and vegetables for over a million people per year. Forty-four percent of the foods that can be economically grown in BC are still being imported! Fruits and vegetables are the most deficient categories of those food sources. The Peace River valley is capable of producing a variety of crops comparable to BC’s fertile Fraser Valley. As world prices for food escalate, the land BC Hydro plans to flood for Site C is our food security Plan B. Site C dam may have a 100-year life, but the agricultural land in the Peace Valley will support life in perpetuity.” – Economic agrologist Wendy Holm. BC

Several leading economists from both Canada and the U.S. have determined that better and less expensive alternatives to Site C exist. Robert McCullough stated that BC Hydro used data for comparisons that was up to 5 years out of date. The cost of many renewables has come down significantly in the last year or two. Additionally, alternative projects, including geothermal would provide far more long-term jobs in various locations throughout the province and are less risky as they can be built on an as-needed basis.

I urge you to represent the significant numbers of Canadians with growing concern over the way that natural resources are being managed in this country. Start with pressuring our Federal Government to deny the necessary permits for continued work on the Site C dam project.

Best Regards,
Keith Mayo

2016-05-27 03:14:53
BetteChadwickSecheltBritish Columbia

I do not think a proper business case has been made for this project. Plus, one of Canada's most impactive river systems would be affected,fish, First Nations Concerns, farm land being destroyed forever and the power produced could be replaced by geo thermal,solar,wind without destroying so muc of the environment.
I am very pasionate about this issue and urge the government to take a second look.. If we are moving to a green economy this is not it!

2016-05-27 03:29:15
NMBryantSookeBritish Columbia

Sincerely and seriously, do we have to put so many billions into antiquated technology? There must be another way?!
Can we not take into consider other forms of generating power?
What about all those fracked wells that dot our province...if we go just a wee bit deeper we would have endless heat from the very core of the planet instead of such human destruction like Site C?! The power that is generated would make the resource sector happy (until we tell them they have to help pay for it). Anything would be better than putting us in billions of dollars of dept!
I plead with you all to stop the permits and to work toward with new technology, instead of the vast destruction of a beautiful valley and all it's creatures and pushing of us in BC and the hole country toward moral and monetary bankruptcy!
Sincerely written from my 57 year old breaking heart.
NM Bryant

/

2016-05-27 03:29:28
DeirdreWhalenRichmondBritish Columbia

Please stop Site C. We do not need to power, nor do we need to send it south. The land the BC government wants to flood is some of the richest soil in Canada. It is our "bread belt." Once it is flooded it is gone forever. The Peace VAlley should be used for food production to protect BC's food security for future generations.

Stop Site C!

2016-05-27 03:37:26
DeirdreWhalenRichmondBritish Columbia

Please stop Site C. We do not need to power, nor do we need to send it south. The land the BC government wants to flood is some of the richest soil in Canada. It is our "bread belt." Once it is flooded it is gone forever. The Peace VAlley should be used for food production to protect BC's food security for future generations.

Stop Site C!

2016-05-27 03:39:06
KarenWilsonGoldenBritish Columbia

Not only does flooding farmland make absolutely no sense, this Dam will destroy the habitat of thousands of creatures. There will be widespread death and displacement. This is 2016, we need to be investing in forward thinking energy programs like geothermal that will not continue to destroy our earth and its creatures. Please vote no on site C!

2016-05-27 04:01:45
peneloecroweVictoriaBritish Columbia

Above all creating yet another damn when the trend across N America is to close down damns and allow fish to return to their habitat and other wildlife to live as they should.
Ignoring the land that has belonged to First Nations peoples for generations is consciously violating their rights.

2016-05-27 04:12:03
GraceLawVancouverBritish Columbia

Dear MP Hedy Fry,

In the coming weeks the federal government will make decisions on permits necessary for continued construction of the Site C dam.

Despite public commitments to respect the rights of Indigenous peoples and ensure transparent and accountable environmental assessment process, Prime Minister Trudeau and his Cabinet have refused to address the many concerns about Site C.

The joint federal-provincial environmental impact assessment (http://www.ceaa.gc.ca/050/documents/p63919/99173E.pdf) concluded that construction of the dam would severely and permanently undermine Indigenous peoples’ use of the land; harm rare plants and other biodiversity; make fishing unsafe for at least a generation; and submerge burial grounds and other crucial cultural and historical sites.

The federal and provincial approvals for the project were given on the basis of the claim that these serious, permanent harms to the environment and Indigenous culture were “justified” by the benefits of the project but they won’t provide us with any details of this ‘justification’ made behind closed doors. (http://www.alaskahighwaynews.ca/regional-news/site-c/despite-cabinet-secrecy-federal-decision-on-site-c-ok-judge-rules-1.2045577)

“The Peace River Valley can provide fruits and vegetables for over a million people per year. Forty-four percent of the foods that can be economically grown in BC are still being imported! Fruits and vegetables are the most deficient categories of those food sources. The Peace River valley is capable of producing a variety of crops comparable to BC’s fertile Fraser Valley. As world prices for food escalate, the land BC Hydro plans to flood for Site C is our food security Plan B. Site C dam may have a 100-year life, but the agricultural land in the Peace Valley will support life in perpetuity.” – Economic agrologist Wendy Holm. BC

The Joint Review Panel was unsatisfied with the need for and the cost of the project as well as the lack of research into alternatives to Site C. The Chair of the Joint Review Panel, economist, Dr. Harry Swain took the unprecedented step of speaking out (http://www.desmog.ca/2015/03/10/exclusive-b-c-government-should-have-deferred-site-c-dam-decision-chair-joint-review-panel) on these concerns repeatedly in the media, after the governments decided to proceed with Site C without paying heed to these key recommendations.

Additionally, Dr. Swain stated that if the government wished to proceed with Site C, then these matters of concern should be thoroughly assessed by the independent, arms-length-from-government, British Columbia Utilities Commission. The government’s response to this was to state that these particular matters of concern were actually outside the mandate of the Joint Review Panel! This issue is now before the courts! (http://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/pvla-appeals-bc-supreme-court-ruling-on-site-c--strongly-endorses-bc-auditor-general-performance-audit-of-site-c-518113251.html)

Several leading economists from both Canada and the U.S. have determined that better and less expensive alternatives to Site C exist. Robert McCullough stated that BC Hydro used data for comparisons that was up to 5 years out of date. The cost of many renewables has come down significantly in the last year or two. Additionally, alternative projects, including geothermal would provide far more long-term jobs in various locations throughout the province and are less risky as they can be built on an as-needed basis.

BC Hydro has stated in court that the legal implications in respect to the Treaty rights of First Nations were never considered at any point in the decision-making process.

As our MP, please speak and represent for Indigenous right and Environmental protection.

Sincerely,
Grace Law

2016-05-27 04:13:11
ElizabethKallerVictoriaBritish Columbia

I've said several times to federal ministers and MPs that the Site C dam is destructive on multiple fronts, that the additional electricity to be produced is not needed, and that, if it were or becomes needed, electricity can be produced in other ways and in other places. Alas, Site C preparation/construction continues.

At the very least, would the federal government please halt the work on Site C until court challenges are heard?

Thank you,

2016-05-27 04:16:19
NylaRaneySalmoBritish Columbia

I am very concerned about the construction of the site C dam. I am in opposition to its creation. I would rather that we in this province we put our focus into food security!! I am not against electricity but I feel that this in not wanted and that Christy Clark is disregarding the public and pushing forward with this unwanted and potentially devastating project.

I request that construction be completely stopped until all the people of this province agree to let it go ahead.

Yours Truly
Nyla Raney

2016-05-27 04:19:18
BillMcCaughertyGabriola IslandBritish Columbia

Dear Sheila,
Below is a copy of an email I sent to the then minister respecting site C Oct. 2014.
"Dear Minister,
As a concerned citizen of BC I urge you to reject Hydro's application for site C. First and foremost, the citizens of this province do not need any new mega power projects. We currently produce excess power and we can readily meet any new electricity demands such as those required for an electrified transportation fleet, with small scale, distributed renewable energy generation. Even more important, however, is the value of the land for agricultural purposes. Droughts in California make us all much more aware of how vulnerable our food supply is to climatic changes and BC must move towards near full food self sufficiency. The lands to be flooded are just too important for agriculture to needlessly flood to generate power we do not need.

Yours Truly,
Bill McCaugherty
Gabriola Island BC

cc Premier Christy Clark

P.S. I fully understand that site C power is only needed for LNG export. There is no benefit and a huge cost in terms of habitat destruction and financial liability and hence as representatives of the citizens you both have a duty to reject site C."

I received a response from the Federal minister that was far from satisfactory. She basically indicated that the project would cause significant adverse environmental effects but Harper wanted it so that was that.

I also sent this email to Premier Clark and Minister Bennett:

"Dear Premier Clark and Minister Bennett,
I read with great interest the letter addressed to both of you by the CanGEA, dated November 27, 2014, as shown on their website. Given the significant advantages of building geothermal energy capacity in this province over the Site C, both to the taxpayer and ratepayer (as outlined in the CanGEA report), I am very curious as to how you each of you have responded to the request for a meeting with representatives of the CanGEA.
It would seem to me, that geothermal energy as a viable option to mega projects such as Site C, can no longer be ignored by the BC government or BC Hydro. Given the court challenges to Site C and the vocal opposition from many sectors of this province, not to mention the invaluable agricultural land that would be lost with Site C, it would seem prudent to follow the well reasoned recommendations of the CanGEA, for a one year moratorium on the final investment decision for new clean energy, to better explore the geothermal option.
I look forward to your response and please know that I, like thousands of other concerned citizens of this province want to support you and our government in making the right decisions for our collective future. I understand this is not an easy decision to make but to ignore the geothermal option at this time would seem to be a grave mistake. To have a bright future we must be very considerate of the decisions we make in the present. Using the tried and true old metrics of the past, may not serve us well."

I did not receive a response from Premier Clark and received a "site C cheerleader" canned response from Bennett, that did not even mention geothermal.

This project is flawed in so many respects. Please do all you can to stop further construction before we pass the point of no return.

Thanks much,
Bill

2016-05-27 04:25:15
StevenBarringhamVancouverBritish Columbia

This is the wrong project for all reasons. It's past time to put an end to this farce. Period.

2016-05-27 04:46:24
StevenBarringhamVancouverBritish Columbia

This is the wrong project for all reasons. It's past time to put an end to this farce. Period.

2016-05-27 04:46:26
LarryWartelsVictoriaBritish Columbia

Hello Honourable MP Rankin and Honourable Colleagues,

PEOPLE AND PLANET BEFORE POWER FOR PROFITS

PLEASE SAVE SITE-C FARMLAND HABITAT FOR THE FOOD AND CARBON-SINKING WE URGENTLY NEED.

Gratefully,
Larry Wartels
www.DemocracyNow.org

2016-05-27 08:02:56
ElaineHughesARCHERWILLAlabama

In addition to the conclusion presented by the joint federal-provincial environmental impact assessment that construction of the dam would severely and permanently undermine Indigenous peoples’ use of the land; that it will harm rare plants and other biodiversity; that it will make fishing unsafe for at least a generation; and that it will submerge burial grounds and other crucial cultural and historical sites, I strongly agree with Wendy Holm, BC Economic Agrologist, who stated:

"The Peace River Valley can provide fruits and vegetables for over a million people per year. Forty-four percent of the foods that can be economically grown in BC are still being imported! Fruits and vegetables are the most deficient categories of those food sources. The Peace River valley is capable of producing a variety of crops comparable to BC’s fertile Fraser Valley. As world prices for food escalate, the land BC Hydro plans to flood for Site C is our food security Plan B. Site C dam may have a 100-year life, but the agricultural land in the Peace Valley will support life in perpetuity.”

Robert McCullough stated that BC Hydro used data for comparisons that was up to 5 years out of date. The cost of many renewables has come down significantly in the last year or two. Additionally, alternative projects, including geothermal would provide far more long-term jobs in various locations throughout the province and are less risky as they can be built on an as-needed basis.

All of the above provide more than enough reason to scrap this unnecessary and destructive project . . . just say "NO".

It's not too late!.

2016-05-27 13:09:12
Grace and CraigHamiltonCaledon EastOntario

Dear Mr. Tilson,
For the past year and a half, I have been supporting the resistance to the Site C dam because it will destroy a way of life, a long-held and resilient way of making a living and supporting a community both for the indigenous people living there, and the farmers making best use of that land. Rare plants, medicinal possibilities, areas of prominent cultural significance will be extinguished. Diversity of plant and animal species, as well as ways of life, will once again be eliminated. People in positions of power need to be reminded that it's the communities across Canada that make our country unique, not only the economy, or one's political associations/obligations with big businesses. This area provides food, tourism, recreational pursuits, sustainability. People living there will continue to provide for the future. Now more than ever we need to diversify our energy sources. It's difficult and near impossible to please everybody, but we have to do better, and take much better care of our planet and what remains of living things that cannot speak for themselves.

It is our sincere hope that you will stand up for the rights and livelihoods of this community, and stand up for creating a greater diversity of energy uses so that we don't destroy other vibrant and intact communities.

In hope and concern for fellow Canadians impacted by Site C,
Grace Hamilton

2016-05-27 13:24:23
BertReynolds FairviewAlberta

Together with the most valid reasons for not flooding the most picturesque and fertile valley in northern British Columbia, this mega money pit is out of sync with evolving technologies and needs for future generations.

While supporting smaller run of the river dams such as proposed near Dunvegan, Site C is absurd.

2016-05-27 13:41:24
ColleenO'BrienLangleyBritish Columbia

This is a mistake and I believe there are other ways to deal with our future power needs. There is no need to destroy this area by flooding it. Please pray about this, Mark. Follow your heart.

2016-05-27 14:00:49
MicheleDempsterMissionBritish Columbia

Site C dam will not be operational for many years. By this time Canada SHOULD be a world leader in alternate energy technology. BC and Canada SHOULD be putting OUR valuable time and money towards this end and NOT destroying valuable agricultural land.

2016-05-27 14:50:58
DaultonPaynterGanges Salt Spring IslandBritish Columbia

Destruction of important farmland, and not addressing our obligations to the First Nations people!

2016-05-27 15:24:04
MarionJolicoeurRoberts CreekBritish Columbia

My concerns about this proposal are to do with the moral question of unsettled claims with First Nations, and in this time of radical climatic changes it makes no sense to drown an area that could be a great resource for food production in the future. I question the wisdom of the push for this power source to export even MORE FOSSIL FUELS, especially when they are being recovered through the dangerous practice of FRACKING.

2016-05-27 15:29:06
MichaelSherlockLadysmithBritish Columbia

My concerns are as follows;
The joint federal-provincial environmental impact assessment concluded that construction of the dam would severely and permanently undermine Indigenous peoples’ use of the land; harm rare plants and other biodiversity; make fishing unsafe for at least a generation; and submerge burial grounds and other crucial cultural and historical sites.

The federal and provincial approvals for the project were given on the basis of the claim that these serious, permanent harms to the environment and Indigenous culture were “justified” by the benefits of the project but they won’t provide us with any details of this ‘justification’ made behind closed doors.

“The Peace River Valley can provide fruits and vegetables for over a million people per year. Forty-four percent of the foods that can be economically grown in BC are still being imported! Fruits and vegetables are the most deficient categories of those food sources. The Peace River valley is capable of producing a variety of crops comparable to BC’s fertile Fraser Valley. As world prices for food escalate, the land BC Hydro plans to flood for Site C is our food security Plan B. Site C dam may have a 100-year life, but the agricultural land in the Peace Valley will support life in perpetuity.” – Economic agrologist Wendy Holm. BC

The Joint Review Panel was unsatisfied with the need for and the cost of the project as well as the lack of research into alternatives to Site C. The Chair of the Joint Review Panel, economist, Dr. Harry Swain took the unprecedented step of speaking out on these concerns repeatedly in the media, after the governments decided to proceed with Site C without paying heed to these key recommendations.

Additionally, Dr. Swain stated that if the government wished to proceed with Site C, then these matters of concern should be thoroughly assessed by the independent, arms-length-from-government, British Columbia Utilities Commission. The government’s response to this was to state that these particular matters of concern were actually outside the mandate of the Joint Review Panel! This issue is now before the courts!

Several leading economists from both Canada and the U.S. have determined that better and less expensive alternatives to Site C exist. Robert McCullough stated that BC Hydro used data for comparisons that was up to 5 years out of date. The cost of many renewables has come down significantly in the last year or two. Additionally, alternative projects, including geothermal would provide far more long-term jobs in various locations throughout the province and are less risky as they can be built on an as-needed basis.
BC Hydro has stated in court that the legal implications in respect to the Treaty rights of First Nations were never considered at any point in the decision-making process.

2016-05-27 16:23:44
GinaRogersVictoriaBritish Columbia

Federal officials repeatedly state that they can’t comment on Site C because “it’s before the courts.” Don’t let them get away with this non-answer!

The court process could take years to resolve, especially if the federal government continues to fight against the First Nations and the landowners in these cases. Meanwhile construction of the dam continues. BC Premier Christy Clark has even said that her goal is to get the dam to “the point of no return.”

BC Hydro has to obtain permits related to continued construction of the dam from the Ministry of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard, as well as from the Ministry of Transport. They have the power to deny these permits and halt construction, which in turn would allow for a thorough assessment of the project by the BC Utilities Commission and would also allow time for the outstanding court cases by First Nations and landowners to be heard and decided upon.

The joint federal-provincial environmental impact assessment concluded that construction of the dam would severely and permanently undermine Indigenous peoples’ use of the land; harm rare plants and other biodiversity; make fishing unsafe for at least a generation; and submerge burial grounds and other crucial cultural and historical sites.

The federal and provincial approvals for the project were given on the basis of the claim that these serious, permanent harms to the environment and Indigenous culture were “justified” by the benefits of the project but they won’t provide us with any details of this ‘justification’ made behind closed doors.

“The Peace River Valley can provide fruits and vegetables for over a million people per year. Forty-four percent of the foods that can be economically grown in BC are still being imported! Fruits and vegetables are the most deficient categories of those food sources. The Peace River valley is capable of producing a variety of crops comparable to BC’s fertile Fraser Valley. As world prices for food escalate, the land BC Hydro plans to flood for Site C is our food security Plan B. Site C dam may have a 100-year life, but the agricultural land in the Peace Valley will support life in perpetuity.” – Economic agrologist Wendy Holm. BC

The Joint Review Panel was unsatisfied with the need for and the cost of the project as well as the lack of research into alternatives to Site C. The Chair of the Joint Review Panel, economist, Dr. Harry Swain took the unprecedented step of speaking out on these concerns repeatedly in the media, after the governments decided to proceed with Site C without paying heed to these key recommendations.

Additionally, Dr. Swain stated that if the government wished to proceed with Site C, then these matters of concern should be thoroughly assessed by the independent, arms-length-from-government, British Columbia Utilities Commission. The government’s response to this was to state that these particular matters of concern were actually outside the mandate of the Joint Review Panel! This issue is now before the courts!

Several leading economists from both Canada and the U.S. have determined that better and less expensive alternatives to Site C exist. Robert McCullough stated that BC Hydro used data for comparisons that was up to 5 years out of date. The cost of many renewables has come down significantly in the last year or two. Additionally, alternative projects, including geothermal would provide far more long-term jobs in various locations throughout the province and are less risky as they can be built on an as-needed basis.
BC Hydro has stated in court that the legal implications in respect to the Treaty rights of First Nations were never considered at any point in the decision-making process.

2016-05-27 16:31:06
EllenRainwalkerCumberlandBritish Columbia

This dam should not be allowed to go ahead until all concerns of First Nations have been addressed. Also a complete assessment done to see whether we really need the power generated from this dam more than we will need the food that could be grown on the lands that are slated to be flooded. BC Hydro has not yet even received all the necessary permits but construction is already underway and contracts for equipment have been signed. This is unacceptable, and possibly even illegal.

The federal and provincial approvals for the project were given on the basis of the claim that serious, permanent harms to the environment and Indigenous culture were “justified” by the benefits of the project but they won’t provide us with any details of this ‘justification’ made behind closed doors.

2016-05-27 16:35:46
CatherineMunnVancouverBritish Columbia

I have a landscaper and an organic gardener for 26 years. I know how important it is to have farmland. I am from Saskatchewan, and have seen our farmlands there bought up by foreign oilmen, our wheatboard sold to someone in the Middle East, and our farming lands ransacked for oil interests. No longer is Saskatchewan the bread basket.

Please let us think about what we need for our children's children, and keep out farmlands.

Catherine Munn

2016-05-27 17:04:44
IreneWrightSalt Spring IslandBritish Columbia

Dear Ms May,

On this issue I expect that we are in complete accord.

There are so many reasons why Site C is harmful, not the least is protection of our agricultural land in a time of global warming/climate change. We cannot depend on the US as we have in recent years.

The dam is not needed. There are many opportunities for micro hydro installation and particularly for other forms of energy development that do not involve harm: solar, wind, etc.

An equally big issue is the offence to our First Nations people who have lived in this region for millenia.

Sincerely,

2016-05-27 17:06:32
JonathanBessetteVancouverBritish Columbia

Dear Jenny,

I have been following the debacle which is the 'site-C damn' project for awhile now. Much of the information I have learned about this damn is frighteningly problematic. I'm not sure what kind of conversation is going on about this project at parliament, but I would be an embarrassed BC citizen if it was anything about condemnation of the site-C damn.
The fact that this project was pushed through the environmental process in the last 2 weeks of the Harper government shows the complete disregard for a real evaluation of the impact of the damn, and the dismissive attitude towards the actual people of the land who live in the Peace Valley region.
Not only is this project not for the people of BC, who will inevitably pay for it through the 30% increase to BC Hydro customers, but the energy itself will be put towards industries that are not readily supported by all BC citizens... this is another way the government still feels justified in taking advantage of the people who have no other choice, since BC hydro has a monopoly on energy in BC.
This kind of behavior is disgusting, and shows the true Neo-Liberal agenda that is dragging this country and its people further away from equality and rights of all peoples, both indigenous and those who are remnants of the colonization of Turtle Island.
Not only will this damn but BC into a deficit, which I'm sure the government will seek some new way to tax us in order to balance their books, but it presents jobs only to a tiny fraction of BC citizens. The citizens who will benefit from this project will be primarily those of the upper middle class, and upper class, and this speaks to the rigid unfairness present in the kinds of capitalist practices related to resource extraction not only in BC but throughout Canada. Profits over people, materialism over humanitarianism...

What is being done?

Jonathan

2016-05-27 18:27:24
VirginiaSmithSummerlandBritish Columbia

I recently spoke to someone in your constituency office and requested a meeting with you to discus my concerns about the Site C dam. Key federal cabinet ministers mandates included a desire to stop construction on the Site C dam, and recent polls show that the majority of British Columbians want this project stopped as well.

My main concerns are as follows:
1. The loss of critical wildlife habitat.
2. The loss of food producing land.
3. There are less destructive and cheaper alternatives.
4. The infringement of Treaty and Aboriginal rights.
5. We don't need the power.
6. An assessment by the BCUC must be done before this ill-conceived project goes 'past the point of no return'.

As a Summerland resident, I was looking forward to the wind farm that was proposed for my area. Now I understand that this and other renewable energy projects have been scrapped in favour of the Site C dam. I find this unacceptable. Are we not supposed to be reducing our GHG emissions while at the same time using taxpayers' money wisely?

Please speak up for the residents of your constituency that are concerned for our environment and the future of our children and grandchildren.

2016-05-27 18:27:37
DrinaReadVancouverBritish Columbia

Dear Dr. Fry,

Citizens of BC have continuously voiced opposition to the Site C project. Please add your voice to this opposition and urge your colleagues to do everything in their power to reject this foolhardy plan to destroy the precious farmland, aboriginal heritage sites, and wildlife in the Peace River valley.

Intelligent people know that there are other means of producing power without destroying this habitat.

Please take a stand against the Site C project.

Thank you!

2016-05-27 18:46:05
JacobFehrFort St. JohnBritish Columbia

There are much cheaper and less environmentally damaging alternatives available. Just a bad idea to sacrifice such a beautiful valley for energy that is not even truly needed right now. Not everything can have a price put on it - "man shall not live by bread alone."

2016-05-27 19:24:07
JohnFryBowen islandBritish Columbia

it'a too important to loose. There has to be a better way.

2016-05-27 19:39:52
DanFlemingRichmondOntario

I have no idea on your current stand on this issue since as the former Party leading the government you were not an advocate for first nation concerns nor the environment. However I have family in BC and I and they are very much NOT in favour of this projext. Pls convince the current government to halt Site C.

2016-05-27 19:42:19
GlenTimmsVictoriaBritish Columbia

I accept the conclusions of the joint environmental impact asessment and review That this dam will severely affect the indigenous people of the region. Therfore I urge you yo stop Site C dam. Thank you.

2016-05-27 21:01:39
Kathryn ComerfordVictoriaBritish Columbia

I believe it is totally inappropriate to allow the site C dam development.

British Columbia does not have a wealth of arable land and is experiencing increased desertification of existing agricultural lands. Flooding the Peace River will destroy rich productive farm land and displace many farmers; destroy rare plants and habitats; negate indigenous peoples cultural use of the land and destroy historic sites.

In this time of marked climate change, flooding productive agricultural land is the short sighted opposite of what needs to be done.

We need to focus on green energy and food security.

B.C. Premier Christie Clark its determined to get Site C "to the point of no return." Please put a stop work order in place on Site C while the courts decide what to do. This will give time for all parties seriously and permanently effected by this construction to be heard.

If this is before the courts why is work continuing on the site? Stop the work. Nothing can justify the massive destruction and risk to our collective futures this site will create.

Please don't let Premier Clark destroy the food security future of BC by the short sighted flooding of agricultural land.

BC governments are known for building dams as monuments to their term in power, please don't let this happen in the Peace.

Thank you

Kathryn Comerford.

to power herpower to our hungry neighbours to
Please seriously consider the

2016-05-27 21:47:15
PeterGeorgeGabriolaBritish Columbia

1. Not respecting First Nations rights and ligitations
2. Inefficient use of public funding for power generation that is not needed, will drain taxpayer disposable income to pay the debt load.
3. Loss of valuable farm land which will be in short supply in the future as climate change increasingly diminishes farming productivity lower latitudes

2016-05-27 23:34:51
JenniferCarterKagawongOntario

Destroying the eco-system
Destroying farmland
Destroying First Nation's Territory!

This must not happen.

2016-05-27 23:56:03
JenniferCarterKagawongOntario

Destroying the eco-system
Destroying farmland
Destroying First Nation's Territory!

This must not happen.

2016-05-27 23:56:05
JenniferCarterKagawongOntario

Destroying the eco-system
Destroying farmland
Destroying First Nation's Territory!

This must not happen.

2016-05-27 23:56:06

420 Letters to Justin Trudeau asking to Stop Site

500 Public Letters Thanks BC MLA’s For Opposing Site C Dam

about

About This Campaign

This campaign to generate public comments to the Federal and BC governments on the proposed Site C dam is organized by Peace Valley Environment Association.

The Peace Valley Environment Association was formed in 1975 to counter the proposal by BC Hydro and Power Authority to build the Site C dam and power station on the Peace River, 18km upstream from Taylor and 6.5km southwest of Fort St. John, BC.

PVEA will continue to work to ensure that the court of public opinion against Site C is loud and clear! Our organization works collaboratively with a number of other groups including Yellowstone to Yukon Conservation Initiative (Y2Y), BC Wilderness Committee, Sierra Club BC and Treaty 8 Tribal Association. Additionally, funding supported has been gratefully received from West Coast Environmental Law’s Environmental Dispute Resolution Fund, Vancouver Foundation, Y2Y, BC Women’s Institute and many generous individuals.

Site C is not in the best interests of British Columbians for a multitude of reasons ranging form economic, social, cultural and environmental. It will result in an oversupply of power for many years and will cost BC Hydro ratepayers billions of dollars. If and when additional power sources are required in the province, there are many better and less expensive alternatives.

To find out more, visit our website and social media channels:

stopsignlogo250facebook-logo     twitter_logo

About Real Hearings

The Massey Tunnel Replacement Public Engagement Project is part of the RealHearings project.

Real Hearing - 600x600 engagementtoolsRealHearings.org creates accessible, easy to use commenting platforms for organizations working on environment, climate and other progressive campaigns. RealHearings.org is dedicated to openness and transparency in government decision making and facilitates public input to decision making processes.

Our commenting platforms are tailored to suit individual campaign needs. Background documents, images and commenting forms (including cc’s to relevant third parties) are all supported to create a single destination where the public can learn about and provide comment to government on a particular campaign issue.In addition, RealHearings.org commenting platforms allow creation of open, searchable archives of public comments for each campaign.  Once comments are sent to government, we retain a permanent copy to create an accessible record of public concern.

To find out more, visit www.realhearings.org to learn more.

Aerial Filming

This video of the Peace River Valley was created by Eoghan Moriarty from Mindagape Creative.