Planning to dredge the Burrard Inlet to maximize oil shipments is underway
An ocean pollution researcher and at least one First Nation are raising concerns about the Vancouver Fraser Port Authority's (VFPA) plan to dredge the Burrard Inlet.
Dredging is when the bed of a body of water is dug out to make way for ships or for construction or cleaning purposes.
Ocean researcher Juan José Alava told CBC's On The Coast that periodic dredging is common for navigation maintenance in the Inlet. However, he says he was surprised to hear that the port is planning to dredge for the purpose of maximizing oil tanker capacity.
The VFPA plan is to maximize oil shipments from the port. Currently, Aframax tankers, a specific size of oil tanker, with a deadweight ranging from 80,000 to 120,000 metric tonnes, can carry loads up to 80 per cent, with the goal of increasing capacity to 100 per cent. However, doing so carries the risk of hitting the sea bottom.
According to Alava, another risk is environmental harm.
Alava is the principal investigator for the Ocean Pollution Research Unit at the University of British Columbia, and says that this development is deeply concerning because of the potential effect on water quality, aquatic life, and First Nations culture in the area that is dependent on the Inlet and the Second Narrows channel.
"At what environmental cost, for a single tanker, do you want to dredge the Burrard Inlet? What about the First Nation communities that are living there?"
He says that as a scientist who studies marine toxicology, the risk of dredging to increase oil tanker capacity can have a drastic impact on the environment if there is an oil spill, citing lessons learned from the Exxon Valdez southern Alaska spill 36 years ago.
Alava says that you can still find oil remnants in B.C. from that spill today, so environmental impact assessments and Indigenous consultation are necessary.
Tsleil-Waututh Nation's Chief, Jen Thomas, said in a written statement on May 8, that no formal engagement has happened about dredging the Burrard Inlet that runs past the nation.
Thomas says that the nation firmly opposed the Trans Mountain Expansion Project, adding that the Government of Canada built it despite the nation's informed decision not to consent to the project.
"Tsleil-Waututh has a sacred, legal obligation to protect, defend and steward our Inlet. We hold inherent and Constitutionally-protected Indigenous title and rights to this area."
Under UNDRIP, the B.C. government has a duty to obtain free, prior and informed consent from First Nations when pursuing projects in their territories.
Thomas says that the nation will have more to say about the matter once it reviews the proposal and says that it looks forward to meeting with agencies in the future about any projects that may affect Tsleil-Waututh Nation rights and title.
Despite concerns from environmentalists and First Nations, B.C. Energy and Climate Solutions Minister Adrian Dix is supportive of the project, pending it meeting environmental assessment and consultation requirements with First Nations.
In a report from the Canadian Press released on May 11, Dix says that the province spoke with the Tsleil-Waututh Nation before expressing views about the project to the federal government.
The plan, floated by Prime Minister Mark Carney in early May, comes at a time when Canada is looking to diversify energy exports away from the United States.
Dix stressed that the dredging would be a federal project, not provincial and that the project "would allow for less traffic at the port and better utilization" because ships could fully load.
The dredging project's preliminary stages of environmental assessment and First Nation consultation began on May 20.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CTV News
23 minutes ago
- CTV News
Five things to know about Canada's counter-tariffs on the U.S.
President Donald Trump speaks during an event to announce new tariffs in the Rose Garden at the White House, Wednesday, April 2, 2025, in Washington. (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein) OTTAWA — After U.S. President Donald Trump boosted steel and aluminum tariffs to 50 per cent, some industry groups and the Official Opposition have called on the federal government to retaliate in kind. Here's a look at the counter-tariffs Canada has imposed so far. 1. What do the counter-tariffs cover? The Canadian government has imposed retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods three times since Trump's trade war began, aimed at what it says are imports worth $95.4 billion worth. On March 4 — after the U.S. imposed 25 per cent tariffs on all Canadian goods, along with 10 per cent on energy products — then-prime minister Justin Trudeau announced the first raft of counter-tariffs on $30 billion worth of U.S. goods. Those 25 per cent tariffs target things like orange juice, motorcycles, clothing and shoes, coffee, cosmetics and alcohol. On March 12, the U.S. added a 25 per cent tariff on all steel and aluminum products, which was stacked on top of existing levies on Canadian goods. Canada's response a day later was 25 per cent reciprocal tariffs on another $29.8 billion of U.S. goods, including steel and aluminum, tools, computers and sport equipment. On April 9, in response to another round of U.S. tariffs — this time targeting the Canadian auto industry — the federal government imposed 25 per cent duties on 'non-CUSMA compliant vehicles' from the U.S. and 25 per cent tariffs on the content of CUSMA-compliant vehicles from the U.S. The government says this covers $35.6 billion in auto imports from the United States. 2. What are the exemptions? On April 15, in the midst of the federal election campaign, Prime Minister Mark Carney announced that the government was exempting some products from tariffs for six months to help Canadian businesses adapt. The tariff holiday covers specific categories: goods used in Canadian manufacturing, processing and food and beverage packaging, as well as imports used to support public health, health care, public safety and national security objectives. And when it comes to vehicle tariffs, the government said 'companies that produce autos in Canada have been granted remission to ensure the ongoing viability of their Canadian operations,' but that it is 'contingent on them maintaining production levels in Canada and on following through with planned investments.' 3. Does this mean all counter-tariffs have been dropped? On Wednesday, Opposition House leader Andrew Scheer said the government 'secretly dropped those tariffs to zero during the campaign.' This line has been repeated often by the Conservatives since the release of a report by Oxford Economics on May 13, which said Canada paused counter-tariffs for six months 'on nearly all U.S. goods imports.' The report said it estimated the exemptions would cover about 97 per cent of the tariffs. The government said that's not true. A spokesperson for Industry Minister Mélanie Joly said the exemptions apply to 30 per cent of the $60 billion worth of goods that are subject to tariffs — a figure that doesn't include the auto tariffs. William Pellerin, a partner in international trade at McMillan LLP, said the exemption is not nearly as broad as what's been reported. 'I think that report caused a lot of consternation within the trading community and the legal community. It is absolutely, certainly not zero impact on our clients,' he said, noting many of them are paying millions of dollars in duties already. 4. Where does all this leave Canadian businesses? Pellerin said there's a lot of confusion out there about what's covered by the exemptions. The Canada Border Services Agency has issued a customs notice explaining how to interpret the exemptions, 'but in many circumstances it's simply not obvious at all,' Pellerin said. As an example, he said he has clients who have been told by the CBSA that imported agricultural equipment is not exempt. 'We actually think that that's legally incorrect, that they've poorly interpreted the order-in-council,' he said. That's the kind of thing his firm is trying to sort out while it waits and hopes for a long-term resolution. 'Whatever actions need to be taken to get back to a tariff-free world (are) absolutely necessary,' he said. 5. How much tariff revenue has the government collected and where is it going? Conservative MPs have been asking this question in the House of Commons all week. On Tuesday, Conservative MP Dan Albas charged that 'Liberals promised $20 billion in elbows-up U.S. tariffs, but later dropped them with no regard to affected Canadian workers or fiscal impacts.' Prime Minister Carney responded to say that tariffs are still in effect and $1.7 billion has been collected so far. The federal government's latest fiscal monitor showed Canada collected an extra $617 million in import duties in March, as compared to the year before. Figures for April and May have not yet been published. During the election campaign, the Liberals and the Conservatives both estimated Canada would collect $20 billion in tariff revenue this fiscal year. In its election platform, the Liberal party pledged that 'every dollar raised from these tariffs will support Canadian workers and businesses affected by the trade war.' Officials at the Finance Department said in a statement that the money is going into the consolidated revenue fund and being used 'to support those hardest hit by this economic disruption.' The statement said that is happening through programs like employment insurance work-sharing, deferral of corporate income tax payments and GST/HST remittances, or by offering liquidity support through Export Development Canada, Farm Credit Canada, Business Development Canada and the Large Enterprise Tariff Loan Facility. — With files from Craig Lord This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 5, 2025. Sarah Ritchie, The Canadian Press
CTV News
29 minutes ago
- CTV News
‘Forget about the past': Fans weigh in on criticism of Wayne Gretzky over Trump ties
Former NHL player Wayne Gretzky, right, and his wife Janet Jones arrive before the 60th Presidential Inauguration in the Rotunda of the U.S. Capitol in Washington, Monday, Jan. 20, 2025. (Kevin Lamarque/Pool Photo via AP) EDMONTON — It wasn't long ago that some Canadians were up in arms about hockey legend Wayne Gretzky's ties to U.S. President Donald Trump's administration. But as the Edmonton Oilers skate their way through the Stanley Cup final, hockey fans say it's time to let bygones be bygones. 'I don't think it matters,' said Craig Hiscock, a longtime Oilers fan, as he posed Wednesday for a photo with a statue of Gretzky outside Rogers Place in Edmonton ahead of Game 1. 'Let's forget about the past. What he did here was a lot for the city, a lot for hockey.' The statue was vandalized in March and smeared with what appeared to be and strongly smelled like feces. On Wednesday, a hip-high metal fence was up around the bronze figure. An online petition started in February calling for a new name for Wayne Gretzky Drive also has about 14,000 signatures. Gretzky, the Ontario-born hockey star who led the Oilers to four Stanley Cup victories in the 1980s, recently drew the ire of Canadians for his public support of Trump, who has repeatedly expressed his desire for Canada to join the U.S and become its 51st state. The Great One was photographed with Trump several times at the president's Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida. In January, Gretzky and his wife, Janet, attended Trump's inauguration in Washington. Frustrations grew after he appeared as honorary captain for Canada at the 4 Nations Face-Off final with the United States. Video footage showed him giving the U.S. team a thumbs-up as he walked to the ice. Gretzky also congratulated Dallas Stars players in their locker room last month, after they advanced to the Western Conference final. The Oilers eliminated the Stars in five games and now have one win against the Florida Panthers in the Cup final. Game 2 is Friday night. Brian Foulken, who became a fan during the Gretzky era and collects Oilers merchandise, said Gretzky's accomplishments, including multiple scoring records that stand to this day, still resonate with people. As for the criticism, Foulken said people are going to have their own opinions. 'At the end of the day, (Gretzky) played here for a long time. The diehard Oilers (fans), we love him,' he said outside the arena before Game 1. 'He's an amazing player.' Foulken added that current Oilers captain Connor McDavid is inching closer to Gretzky-level greatness. Darren Rogers, a Gretzky fan since the Oilers' inception into the NHL in 1979, said Gretzky's leadership led the team to win multiple Stanley Cups. Politics aside, that accomplishment should matter more to people in the grand scheme of things, Rogers said. Gretzky was in Edmonton for Wednesday's game. And as storied as Gretzky is to the Oilers franchise, he appeared to still be catching up to this new generation's fan base. On an American sports network, he sat side by side with commentators, as they discussed the Oilers' new tradition of playing the pop song 'Pink Pony Club.' Players have been tight-lipped about the significance of the Chappell Roan hit, typically heard after the team plays 'La Bamba' by Los Lobos following a win. 'Pink Pony — is that a band or is that a song?' the 64-year-old Gretzky asked TNT Sports co-host Paul Bissonnette following the Oilers' 4-3 overtime victory in Game 1. '(Roan) sings a song, 'Pink Pony Club,' and it's famous. It's on the radio,' Bissonnette answered. 'It's the new generation, Wayne,' he added. Gretzky appeared disappointed to learn Roan isn't Canadian, but still seemed eager to check out the song. 'I gotta get that (as) my ringtone,' Gretzky said. This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 6, 2025. Aaron Sousa, The Canadian Press
National Observer
an hour ago
- National Observer
Prince Rupert gas pipeline cleared to keep environmental permit indefinitely
The Prince Rupert gas pipeline project is 'substantially started' and will keep its valid environmental certificate for the life of the pipeline, the BC Environmental Assessment Office has ruled. The Prince Rupert Gas Transmission (PRGT) pipeline is jointly owned by the Nisga'a Nation and Western LNG, but other First Nations and environmentalists say the decision favours corporate interests over climate commitments and Indigenous rights. Tara Marsden, sustainability director for the Gitanyow hereditary chiefs, said the decision was not unexpected, but still 'damaging and daunting.' She said the province frequently bends or breaks its own laws and regulations to accommodate PRGT, undermining the integrity of the environmental review process. 'This is absolutely not in the interests of Gitanyow and many other nations who have expressed concern,' Marsden said. 'It's going to be a significant reversal of the climate policy of this government." The BC government has legislated targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. But according to critics, pursuing additional LNG and pipeline projects will undercut any progress made by adding significant new emissions that were not considered in the province's climate plans. Marsden said the government is acting without responsibility, forcing First Nations to fight in court because it doesn't respect consultation, Indigenous rights, UNDRIP or true consent — and the decision was politically and economically driven, not based on policy, law or sound science. 'This is absolutely not in the interests of Gitanyow and many other nations who have expressed concern,' Tara Marsden, sustainability director for the Gitanyow hereditary chiefs. 'It's going to be a significant reversal of the climate policy." 'This government can now do whatever it pleases with no accountability,' Marsden said. 'First Nations are left to fight for these things on the ground and in the courts.' She said the report by the Environmental Assessment Office (EAO) — the agency tasked with technical review — was 'very slim,' noting that Gitanyow's own submission was likely twice as long. Janelle Lapointe, senior advisor at the David Suzuki Foundation and member of Stellat'en First Nation, said the approval casts significant doubt on the province's willingness to meet its climate targets, respect Indigenous rights and title, and even follow its own policy on determining whether a project has had a 'substantial start.' The keyword — substantial start — is critical because under BC's Environmental Assessment Act, a project's environmental certificate will expire unless enough real, physical work has been completed on the ground before a set deadline — in this case, November 25, 2024. According to the EAO report, the PRGT pipeline was considered 'substantially started' because the company cleared 42 km of pipeline route, built nine permanent bridges, upgraded or built 47 km of access roads, and set up work areas before the deadline. The company also spent about $584 million on the project since 2013. The concerns related to greenhouse gas emissions and incomplete permits were not part of the decision and was mainly based on the physical work completed on the ground. 'If PRGT was really a good project, it wouldn't need a decade-old permit, quiet approvals, and a government bending the rules to push it through,' Lapointe said. She said since the original environmental assessment certificate was issued in 2014, lands, waterways, and ecology have only become more vulnerable due to continued extraction, corporate greed, and the accelerating effects of climate change. Lapointe said the project will cross hundreds of fish-bearing streams and rivers in a watershed that her community depends on. The government is again refusing to ensure the project won't harm their ecosystems, especially salmon — a key species important to their culture and vital to the local economy, she said. 'The province has failed to address the concerns of the Indigenous nations asserting their rights to protect our territory. It sets a very dangerous precedent,' Lapointe said. She pointed out that newly passed Bill 15 and the PRGT approval highlight a troubling trend — the provincial government is making it easier for corporations to move projects forward, while making it difficult for Indigenous nations to exercise their rights and oppose developments that threaten their territories. 'Are they going to allow outdated permits from 2014 to be treated as more legitimate than the rights of sovereign nations? I am left wondering, why is our province bending over backwards to hand over critical energy infrastructure to American billionaires?' Lapointe said. Christina Smethurst, communications head at Dogwood BC, a Victoria-based non-profit, non-partisan citizen action group, said while the EAO issued the approval, there has been no clear public statement or ownership from elected government officials about the decision, with significant environmental, Indigenous rights and economic implications. "The BC NDP have abandoned any semblance of caring about climate change,' Smethurst said. "Where is the government on this? Who of our elected officials will take responsibility for making this decision?' Marsden said Gitanyow is preparing legal and other actions, and the fight to protect their lands will continue. Lapointe said they would follow Gitanyow's lead in the ongoing opposition to the pipeline. Marsden also challenged the narrative that this project would help Canada's energy independence. 'This isn't about getting out from under the thumb of Americans. It's actually about enriching people who are in Trump's inner circle,' Marsden said.
