Fiddle is trying to stir up the 'fishies' non-issue at SC citing a rivers without borders letter of concerns about development along the Stikine River and hinting that Alaska will be putting up a fight.

A while back I looked at the US/Can boundary water treaty signed over 100 years ago. It is a dated document and as such is quite focused on the current issues around the Great Lakes/ St. Lawrence. It covers navigation, water rights and pollution. There are worse legal documents to read but the CUU folks can take some comfort in this section:

PRELIMINARY ARTICLE

For the purpose of this treaty boundary waters are defined as the waters from main shore to main shore of the lakes and rivers and connecting waterways, or the portions thereof, along which the international boundary between the United States and the Dominion of Canada passes, including all bays, arms, and inlets thereof, but not including tributary waters which in their natural channels would flow into such lakes, rivers, and waterways, or waters flowing from such lakes, rivers, and waterways, or the waters of rivers flowing across the boundary...........

....ARTICLE IV

The High Contracting Parties agree that, except in cases provided for by special agreement between them, they will not permit the construction or maintenance on their respective sides of the boundary of any remedial or protective works or any dams or other obstructions in waters flowing from boundary waters or in waters at a lower level than the boundary in rivers flowing across the boundary, the effect of which is to raise the natural level of waters on the other side of the boundary unless the construction or maintenance thereof is approved by the aforesaid International Joint Commission.

It is further agreed that the waters herein defined as boundary waters and waters flowing across the boundary shall not be polluted on either side to the injury of health or property on the other.

http://bwt.ijc.org/index.php?page=Treaty-Text&hl=eng

http://ec.gc.ca/eau-water/default.asp?lang=En&n=B947BAA8-1

Schaft Creek deposit / mine is in-directly tributary to the Stikine. Schaft Creek flows past some of the wast dumps and could potentially risk picking up deleterious agents (acids, metals etc). Skeeter creek drains the Tailings Storage Facility area and empties into Schaft Creek. Schaft Creek then goes on to empty into Mess Creek (fish). Mess Creek empties into the Stikine.

The beautiful Stikine flows for about 170 km from the Mess junction to the Alaskan border. In that 170km, the Stikine accepts significant water from the Barrington River (just north of BXX's Dok property), Monsoon Creek (river) near the Alaskan border and a great number of other small to medium sized streams.

So... in order for SC to pollute the Stikine to the point of causing "injury of health and property on the other [country]", it would have to have a catastrophic failure of the TSF at Skeeter.

British Columiba & Canadian law prohibit pollution to the Mess Creek fish. So the daily effluent discharge will have to be within Canadian limits for MC itself. Since MC waters are diluted to the nth degree by the time it reaches Alaska via the Stikine, Alaska will not be able to show injury of health and property to its waters.

I first became aware of SC/CUU in mid 2008. As a forester I was really alarmed at what was planned for Skeeter. My whole office collectively asked "they can do that?". Being newbies to mining, and coming from a forestry perspective where even ditch water has to be protected this seemed astounding.

After reading just about every environmental report on the TSF, acid rock drainage and most of the related legislation, I became quite satisified that CUU was doing a bang up job managing the environment from the start. I've been looking at CUU/SC from an environmental perspective (we are in BC after all) for years and have not found one majour hang-up that would pose a threat to development. Any problems can be mitigated.

As a forester, I am comfortable with what needs to happen in the Skeeter Valley.

CUU's environmental studies:http://www.copperfoxmetals.com/s/SchaftCreek.asp?ReportID=209031

There are concerns with Acid Rock Drainage - as there are with any mine - but CUU has this under control and the environmental setting allows for good management of ACD.

In my humble opinion, there is no better place to plunk a mine of this size in BC.

glta.