Back up to speed on Taseko Mines' proposed Prosperity Mine

I have been without internet service, or at least any sort of consistent service, for the past month and a half.... I realized today what I'd been missing in reporting the situation with Taseko Mines' proposed Prosperity Mine in the Chilcotin.

So I'll go back and post what has happened in the past month and a half, starting with a request from the Federal Review Panel for more information on hydrology and First Nations information.

Briefly, the Panel requested the following:

1. Aquifers Identified for Use as a Source of Make-up Water

2. Ability of the aquifer to supply Make-up Water

The Panel wanted to confirm that there was only one aquifer under discussion. If you read may first post, the issue of aquifers came up when Taseko realized it might not have enough water at all times to prevent the mine tailings from generating acid waste. Their own original hydrology report showed that stream flows were, at best, inconsistent, and the mining company did not consider any contingencies should flows go low in years of low precipitation

The letter can be found here: href="http://www.ceaa-acee.gc.ca/050/document-eng.cfm?document=39079">

The pdf response is here: http://www.ceaa-acee.gc.ca/050/documents/39192/39192E.pdf

Taseko Mines does not seem worried about proving the environmental safety of this proposed mine... their attitude is, let us build it first then we'll worry about making it safe!

From speaking with other minewatchers, I'd say that Taseko is a promotion company first, and mining company second.