Yes, science is crucial in coal mine debate

The science seems to be lining up against the proposal however

In John Harding’s recent editorial (The News, Sept. 18) Mr. Harding in referencing the proposed Raven Coal Mine issue states “let’s hope the science rules the day.”

Many of us who have grave concerns about the massive coal mine proposal also would like to see science play a major part in the decision making on this project as well, but unfortunately this won’t be the case.

Numerous professional and technical experts have repeatedly called for a more rigorous environmental assessment review for the proposed Raven Coal  Mine Project, but sadly, most of the comments and critiques expressed during the public consultation process have not been taken into account, and the terms of reference proposed for the environmental assessment have not been adjusted to address multiple and clearly expressed concerns and recommendations.

If Mr. Harding were to examine the numerous written comments submitted as part of the environmental assessment of the Raven project, he would realize that many of the  concerns from those who are opposed to the massive coal mine proposal are “science based” and not “inflammatory comments of dismiss-it-out-of hand detractors,” as he portrayed.

Finally, while coal mine proponent Dan Berkshire was quoted as saying “we have deep pockets and we’re not going away,” I would like to emphatically state that those who are concerned and opposed to the proposed Raven Coal Mine Project are united more than ever. While we may not have deep pockets, our solidarity and commitment to defeat this ill-conceived coal mine proposal will prevail.

John Snyder

president, CoalWatch Comox Valley Society


Fanny Bay