Want to build a mine? First you’ll need a permit. But who actually does the frontline science to secure that permit? What goes into that research? Can it be trusted? These are just some of the questions people have when it comes to understanding environmental assessments, with much of the public skeptical about the process. We set out to answer to your questions with the help of Sandra Nelson, a biologist with the environmental engineering firm Stantec. Specializing in freshwater ecosystems, Sandra has spent over 15 years assessing the environmental impact of projects large and small. From baseline studies to permitting and monitoring phases, she works with all stakeholders to mitigate project effects on aquatic ecosystems. That means being able to understand and navigate the federal Fisheries Act, the Water Sustainability Act, the BC Oil and Gas Commission, the Navigation Protection Act, the Species at Risk Act, the Wildlife Act, the Riparian Areas Regulation Act and municipal bylaws. Didn’t know there were that many acts and laws? You’re forgiven.
On the shores of Vancouver’s Trout Lake, Sandra took the time to walk us through what our laws mean, and why we should have more faith in the system and the independent scientists that uphold it.
What do you think?
- Do you agree with Sandra that scientists working on environmental approvals don’t allow their bias to enter into the equation?
- If a scientist is being paid by an advocacy organization or a business, does that create bias?
- Do the questions we ask about resource projects go far enough? Or do they go too far?
- Do we take into account far-ranging, downstream consequences that might impact issues that can’t be seen at the local level? Do we account for the impact of regulations on businesses? And if not, what should be done?
- Are there ways to speed up the assessment processes that Sandra outlined without impacting the work of scientists?