Revised Final Environmental Study Report (24 MB) - Gold Canyon ...

Gold Canyon Resources Inc: Final Environmental Study Report Review
March 30, 2013
5.2.2 Eastern Corridor Dimensions
Throughout the ESR there is little discussion of the actual dimensions to be used for the
anticipated corridor. There is reference to the road having dimensions appropriate for a
forestry road, however they are not specified.
Only after requesting the information from GCU, did they indicate that the corridor would
be 15 m wide by 43 km in length, equalling 645 km 2 in total area to be cleared. It was
not stated within the ESR nor Technical Reports, on the true extent of land to be cleared by
GCU for the corridor.
It was stated that a 500 m buffer zone was used to determine corridor impact to large
furbearers; woodland caribou, however it is not clear if this same buffer zone was applied
for other wildlife calculations.
Recommendation: GCU needs to clearly identify eastern corridor dimensions in all GCU
eastern corridor related documents, stating that 645 km 2 of land needs to be cleared for the
project.
Recommendation: GCU needs to provide an explanation for how the impact/buffer zone
area was determined.
5.3 Terrestrial Baseline Report Deficiencies
The terrestrial baseline studies conducted were intended to assess a limited area within
the broader Springpole study area, and do not reflect the true environmental conditions.
Baseline studies are designed to establish what environmental parameters currently exist
in the area, without industrial pressure, so as to determine the degree of impact that the
intended industrial activity will introduce.
The bulk of terrestrial baseline field-work studies were conducted within roughly a 3 km
radius of the primary Springpole campsite. The primary Springpole campsite is an area of
high anthropogenic activity and noise, causing it to be a site of environmental disturbance.
Conducting baseline environmental assessments for wildlife in an area with noisy
industrial activity, would predisposed the study to finding little wildlife in the area:
at the outset of the studies, there is already experimental bias introduced.
The methodology employed for all studies lacks scientific significance and statistical
analysis: many were only conducted only once, and in an area not reflective of the eastern
corridor. Therefore, the ESR is misleading in presenting that there will be minimal impact
to wildlife, as the baseline studies were biased, and fraught with defects as highlighted in
the corresponding sections below.
In some instances, the desktop analysis conducted for the entirety of the regional
project study area, used outdated database information.
19