Richard Gleeson
Northern News Services

NNSL (Dec 14/98) - Diavik is about to provide, or point the way to, answers to some of the most important questions about the impact of Canada's second diamond mine.

The most important question that remains unanswered concerns the effect the mine would have on water quality and fish in Lac de Gras and the Coppermine River.

Diavik has recognized that nutrient levels in the lake -- the quantity of phosphorous in particular -- will increase as a result of its project.

According to a Nov. 30 preliminary review of the information Diavik has provided in its environmental impact report, the explanations of those effects that Diavik has offered so far are not sufficient.

The 15-page review calls for more information, or direction in finding information that exists already, on about 90 different aspects of the report, among them:

• more data on the effect the mine will have on fish and aquatic organisms over time.

• more data on the potential effects of the total phosphorous and nickel in waste rock run-off.

• more data on the effect of the operation of sewage systems on the lake.

"We believe most of the information is in the report already," said Diavik spokesperson Tom Hoefer.

Diavik's report states, "the effects of the increase in trophic status cannot be predicted with any certainty."

Trophic status refers to nutrient levels of the lake. Diavik predicts the increased nutrient levels will result in more algae, and faster-growing and healthier fish.

Hoefer said Diavik will be submitting its response to the preliminary review some time before Christmas.

Responding to verbal and written requests from a number of groups involved in the environmental assessment, DIAND director of renewable resources and environment David Livingstone said the department is "actively considering" extending the Dec. 30 deadline for public input on the environmental assessment report.

Referring to a public meeting held in the community last month, Lutsel K'e Dene Band wildlife, lands and environment committee chairman Charlie Catholique voiced concerns about the Dec. 30 deadline.

"People discussed some issues related to the potential environmental and socio-economic impacts, however, they agreed that this comprehensive study is too rushed," wrote Catholique, emphasizing the last part with italics.

Catholique asked that the deadline be extended to March 1.

Other extension requests came from the North Slave Metis Alliance, Kitikmeot Inuit Association, Yellowknives Dene and Lutsel K'e Dene Band, said Livingstone.

Asked if an extension would have an impact on the overall duration of the review, Livingstone said, "That's part of what we are considering right now -- what the effect (of an extension) would be on the overall time frame."

The comprehensive study process, noted Livingstone, provides flexibility in scheduling. "That's one of the positive features of this process. We are able to listen to folks and adjust accordingly."

The anticipated finish date has been changed several times already.

Currently, the review is scheduled to conclude in early July of 1999. Previously, that date was set for August. The change was made, said Livingstone, when the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency determined it would require two months, not the anticipated 90 days, to review and make a recommendation on the project.