Static WordPress sites have a lot of advantages over more traditional WordPress projects. In most cases they are cheaper, faster, and more secure. However, one big drawback is that you can’t use contact forms on your pages or posts by default. In this guide I’m going to show you a free solution to get around this problem.
Written by Joti Overduin, rally photos by Adil Darvesh | March 13, 2025
After rallying together in the cold in Whitehorse and across the Yukon and NWT last November, the ruling from the judge to dismiss the Yukon government’s case was very much welcome. It was a decision that reflected the reactions of many from the outset of this confusing and disappointing court action on YESAB’s recommendation that the Michelle Creek mining project not proceed.
The Yukon Supreme Court judge determined that bringing this court action forward was both not legally permissible, and out of step with the constitutionally protected process. The judge didn’t touch on the specifics of the YESAB recommendation or how YESAB went about creating it, as that is meant to be discussed between the Yukon government, Trondëk Hwëch’in, and the First Nation of Na-Cho Nyäk Dun.
At CPAWS Yukon we all shared feelings of deep gratitude to Trondëk Hwëch’in and the First Nation of Na-Cho Nyäk Dun for all the energy, time, and work dedicated to defending the integrity of the Peel Plan and the Final Agreements. There was also a strong focus on the importance of baseline data (information about an area before exploration or mining) to evaluate potential impacts and the effectiveness of mitigation efforts on the land, waters, and wildlife—critical not only for the Peel but for development proposals throughout the Yukon.
![Heard in the Courtroom... Consultation was at the “lowest” level of priority, and not needed until only before mining development, not exploration in any case (Yukon government). If this is how the Peel Plan is to be interpreted and applied in the future, it represents “something much less than [we] bargained for” (Tr’ondëk Hwëch’in). The judicial review itself represents a “failure of reconciliation” (First Nation of Na-cho Nyäk Dun). Lawyers cited numerous legal cases which suggested the precedent that provincial and territorial governments do have a treaty obligation to consult before doing something like this (First Nation of Na-cho Nyäk Dun). Note ruling is expected relatively soon, around Feb 2025; stay tuned for more updates!](https://cpawsyukon.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Michelle-Creek-Court-Case-Update-8-819x1024.png "Heard in the Courtroom... Consultation was at the “lowest” level of priority, and not needed until only before mining development, not exploration in any case (Yukon government). If this is how the Peel Plan is to be interpreted and applied in the future, it represents “something much less than [we] bargained for” (Tr’ondëk Hwëch’in). The judicial review itself represents a “failure of reconciliation” (First Nation of Na-cho Nyäk Dun). Lawyers cited numerous legal cases which suggested the precedent that provincial and territorial governments do have a treaty obligation to consult before doing something like this (First Nation of Na-cho Nyäk Dun). Note ruling is expected relatively soon, around Feb 2025; stay tuned for more updates!")
Peel Watershed court case update from December 2024. This isn’t a comprehensive summary of the court proceedings, but rather a glimpse into some key points that stood out to us.
Now that the court action has been dismissed, it is time for the Yukon government to go back to the process of consulting Trondëk Hwëch’in and the First Nation of Na-Cho Nyäk Dun on YESAB’s recommendation for the proposed exploration project. We remain curious and hopeful that the Yukon government will work together with both First Nations to ensure the Peel Plan is upheld, and that it follows YESAB’s thorough recommendation that this first application to develop in the Peel not go ahead. We must ensure that development in the Peel and throughout the Yukon is done in a way the reflects not just the needs of our generation, but many generations from now too.
As Yukon mineral legislation is being re-written, explore the history and future of mining on unceded Indigenous Lands in the Yukon.
This panel was held on March 6th, 2025 as part of a series of four public, virtual panels with thinkers and leaders from across the Yukon and beyond to ask: How can we transform mining to ensure disasters such as the Eagle Mine failure never happen again? What are the alternatives to resource economies?
Panelists included Testloa Smith (Kaska Elder), Josh Barichello (Ross River Dena Council Lands Department), Ann Maje Raider (Kaska Elder, Liard Aboriginal Women’s Society), Linda McDonald (Liard First Nation, Liard Aboriginal Women’s Society), and Hammond Dick (Kaska Elder). Moderated by Caitlynn Beckett (Memorial University) and Jared Gonet (Yukon University).
“Our land, we say, is unceded. It means no treaty, and we still maintain that today. [This] does bring the government to our table. It does bring industry to our table. But they have a process, YESAB, which is legislated to look at how projects are being developed and permitted to become a mine. Because of the time they have slotted to do their assessment there seems to be a big gap [in] what our nation understands about the land, about the animals, about the water, and about all the plants. Traditional knowledge has to be incorporated into these discussions. They’ve tried to, but still they’re not getting [it in] the ways that we wanted to see.”
— Testloa Smith, Kaska Elder
“Back in 2014, the Kaska Nation challenged Yukon government’s free entry into their mining claims and the claims [that] were staked by exploration companies without consultation, because it was adversely affecting aboriginal rights and titles and interests. To date, we’re pushing hard to make sure that any mining companies that have an interest in setting up shop in our traditional territory [are] going to be faced with that prospect of consultation and accommodation. We’re out there, and we’re quite observant about what’s going on.”
— Hammond Dick, Kaska Elder
“For the most part [the people who are there developing the land], they’re from all over the world, or from other parts of the world, whereas Kaska people and other people are living there. The word Kayah, for example, I believe comes from the word ‘foot’ or ‘boot’. We’ve walked on the land, we know the land, our ancestors knew the land, and that’s the relationship to the land. There’s a huge difference just in the perspective and the respect for the land.”
— Linda McDonald, Liard First Nation, Liard Aboriginal Women’s Society
“If you’re being compensated for something, is that, in a way, just an easy way for the mining companies and governments to [get] a green light to do the damage in the first place… How are you going to compensate for a caribou herd? What kind of dollar figure are you going to put on that?”
— Linda McDonald, Liard First Nation, Liard Aboriginal Women’s Society
“The mining companies and legislation do not allow looking at the gender-based analysis when it comes to mining and looking at perpetrators of violence coming into these mining camps. What’s not factored in YESAB is the cultural relevance, the social relevance of mining, what happens to our community, the addictions. None of that is factored. It’s time we look at YESAB and we look at mining legislation that really does protect our lands and our rights to the land.”
— Ann Maje Raider, Kaska Elder, Liard Aboriginal Women’s Society
“I think what has been happening in our territory is that they’ve been stomping on our aboriginal rights and title because they know we don’t have the money. They come and stomp more, [like] the most recent decision with a mine in our backyard. You know our people are saying no. But they don’t want to listen because it means money in the back pockets of government… Our people still live in poverty. The mines come and go, and who’s left with the toxins? We are. Our land is precious to us as it was to our ancestors, but they don’t want to hear [that], so our only recourse is always courts.”
— Ann Maje Raider, Kaska Elder, Liard Aboriginal Women’s Society
“When I listen to many stories of what happened during the land claims discussions, [there’s] rationale for that powerful decision that Kaska made. There were many reasons, but one thing that I hear again and again, is that dividing the land, putting boundaries and borders, and treating different lands differently, was a challenging thing to reconcile for those elders who had a responsibility to all of their territory, to all of their land. Cede, release, and surrender became part of crown lands, the lands that were not chosen to be settlement lands, [and that] was hard to reconcile.”
— Josh Barichello, Ross River Dena Council Lands Department
“They have applications to go and make their trail, to go and drill further on the same area as the [proposed BMC mine]. Now we say the same thing as [with] the mine. We say we got concerns about the caribou, about the water, about our plants, and our gophers, our small animals that we harvest. Yet [they] say you guys are talking about mine permitting, we’re talking about drilling. But it’s the same area, the same concept, the same thing. That’s what really frustrates us. That’s why you hear about colonialism, of things that they try to separate… Our people understand water goes out past the footprint; the animals go past the footprint of the mine.”
— Testloa Smith, Kaska Elder
“The Lands Department, especially in the context without a final agreement, are so underfunded and don’t have the mechanisms that came from the UFA to really get involved in the same way, and so everybody else sort of has a leg up in terms of their ability to engage. At the same time, we’ve been bombarded, absolutely suffocated with all these outside interests. If you look at a map of mineral claims in the Ross River part of the Kaska Nation, I think it’s about 16% of the area has been staked, the rocks have been given away with no treaty on unceded land, with no Kaska consent, or very little consultation in many cases.”
— Josh Barichello, Ross River Dena Council Lands Department
The next panel, Alternatives to Mining, is happening on Tuesday March 25th, 7:00-8:30pm. Click here for the join zoom meeting link.
Supported by CPAWS Yukon, To Swim and Speak with Salmon, and Research from the Front Lines. Organized by Jared Gonet (Faculty in Indigenous Governance and Science at Yukon University and PhD candidate at University of Alberta), Caitlynn Beckett (PhD Candidate at Memorial University), and Krystal Isbister (PhD candidate at University of Alberta and Yukon University); all of whom do research on mining or land relations in the Yukon.
Quotes edited for length and clarity.
Written by Paula Gomez Villalba and Nicole Schafenacker | [post_published]
On June 24, 2024, the heap leach at Victoria’s Gold’s Eagle Mine near Mayo, Yukon, on the traditional territory of the First Nation of Na-cho Nyäk Dun (FNNND), failed, causing a slide that released 300,000 cubic meters of cyanide-contaminated water into the ecosystem.
The cycle that kept hundreds of millions of litres of toxic solution contained broke.
Victoria Gold was unprepared for the crisis, and in the months following the disaster failed to take adequate steps to mitigate the damage, while their financial prospects tanked. Late last summer a court put Victoria Gold into receivership, transferring control of the mine site and the company’s finances to more competent hands. Still, there are huge challenges to overcome, like containing the contaminated water, keeping storage ponds from leaking and overflowing, and stabilizing what remains of the heap leach.
This disaster is yet the latest example showing the Yukon is far behind when it comes to responsible mining. A public inquiry can help us change that. We must understand what policies, decisions, and actions from government and Victoria Gold management led to this disaster.
Water contaminated with cyanide and heavy metals is still seeping into the ground. It has reached local waterways, including Haggart Creek in the South McQuesten watershed, home to grayling, and Yukon River Salmon.
Here, in the South McQuesten River watershed, people fish, hunt, and pick berries. Moose and grizzly bears care for their young, and thousands of birds find refuge during migration. There is no doubt that this disaster will change how people interact with the area.
Quotes from CBC News feature by Julien Greene highlighting people who live near the Eagle Mine Disaster site: Troubled water.
In the disaster, the mine’s heap leach facility, a huge pile of rock over which cyanide solution is cycled to extract gold from the ore, failed. The resulting slide and damage to the facility released over 300,000 cubic metres of cyanide-contaminated water into the ecosystem. A month after the initial failure, the territorial government stepped in to begin groundwater interception, and later a full response coordinated by the territorial government with the FNNND emergency response team and federal government.
Even now, eight months later, cyanide is still infiltrating into the environment, with leaks recently reported from a ruptured pipe and from a storage pond meant to contain contaminated water.
Victoria Gold, the owner of Eagle Mine, had a history of violations, unrealized plans, and broken promises, and repeatedly failing to follow the requirements of their operating licenses or meet deadlines to bring the site into compliance. Mining failures like this should never happen again.
There are a lot of questions unanswered, and a public inquiry is the only way forward to give the South McQuesten watershed the justice and respect it deserves. Tell Yukon government there must be a public inquiry.
According to the internet lately, AI agents are the next wave of innovative AI tech that’s going to make us more efficient, make our lives easier, take our jobs, or end the world. Okay, maybe not that last one, but still, the point is that there are a lot of opinions flying around about AI agents.
Whether you work for a non-profit organization or a charity, or you’re simply running a fundraiser for a particular cause, you know that having a donation form on your website is a must. And if your website happens to run on WordPress, then today’s your lucky day because I’m going to show you one of the easiest available ways to add it.
You might have noticed a new report published on the official website of the WordPress project. I’m emphasizing the word “official” because the publication location is quite strategic, but let’s not get ahead of ourselves here.
If you work in content or social media and you often have to take screenshots of other websites then you know how annoying it is when you come across a page with random obstructions. Whether its a giant banner announcing a seasonal sale, a popup window, a sidebar widget, or some awkwardly inserted Google ad – it doesn’t matter. The point is that you don’t want it there. You want a nice, clean image. Fortunately, there is a very quick and very easy way to do it. Here’s how.
Sometimes the difference between security and compromise comes down to a single click – and a healthy dose of suspicion. And it’s because scammers are getting increasingly sophisticated with their phishing attempts. It’s to the point where even following standard security best practices isn’t enough to protect you. Case in point: last week’s near-successful phishing attack on Zach Latta.
The new DeepSeek R1 model from China launched last week. If you’re into AI or even into technology more broadly, it was hard to miss the news. Everyone was talking about it. But it’s not just that. It’s the way everyone was talking about it. I was left with the impression that DeepSeek is going to drive a stake through the heart of OpenAI and Anthropic.
