Pam Novak & Barry Rothfuss co-founders of the Atlantic Wildlife Institute
The co-founders of the Atlantic Wildlife Institute are calling on the New Brunswick government to cancel NB Power’s plans to build a 500 MW gas and diesel generating plant on the ecologically sensitive Chignecto Isthmus.
Barry Rothfuss and Pam Novak say the environmental costs of the project are “just too outlandish,” a phrase they use in a letter e-mailed to Environment and Climate Change Minister Gilles LePage earlier this month after they had met with in Fredericton on November 20th.
“Public engagement in the Centre Village site selection process simply did not happen,” their letter states referring to NB Power’s announcement on July 14th that the decision had already been made to locate the plant on land it had quietly acquired nearly a year earlier.
“In fact, none of our community concerns are being heard and addressed at the appropriate time before actions are already being taken,” their letter says, adding that the community is being “railroaded” partly through an environmental impact assessment process (EIA) that did not allow for any public participation in selecting a site and partly by pushing the project through as quickly as possible.
“The goal of an EIA is to inform decision-making, and evaluate site alternatives early in the planning process, allowing potential negative impacts to be avoided or minimized before significant time and money are spent on a specific location,” Rothfuss and Novak write.
False information
They suggest that if NB Power and its American partner PROENERGY had followed proper procedures, they would have consulted with regulatory authorities, the general public and Indigenous First Nations in the earliest stages of planning the project and evaluating a potential site.
Instead NB Power issued a news release in mid-summer suggesting this energy project would be environmentally friendly and supported by Indigenous investment, false information reinforced by PROENERGY filings to regulatory authorities, company statements at public meetings and at Tantramar Town Council.
“Greenhouse gas emissions, the draining of an aquifer, diesel gas backup, destruction of an ecologically sensitive ecosystem and wildlife corridor, light and noise pollution are anything but environmentally friendly,” their letters says.
“Marketing it as an Indigenous led project, [was] a key element in avoiding public scrutiny and trying to fast-track this project once it was announced.”
Rothfuss and Novak write that “this is a core breach of trust” designed to mislead government officials such as Premier Holt and MP Dominic LeBlanc as well as the local population and Indigenous peoples raising suspicions about all other claims made by NB Power and PROENERGY.
“Even with nothing further, it is sufficient to justify cancellation of the project.”
PROENERGY has already built a 1.5 kilometre access road to the site
3-legged stool
“There is no question this was done intentionally,” Rothfuss said in an interview with Warktimes.
“This was built on a three-legged stool approach. The first was to blindside us,” he added by depriving people of the ability to contribute their thoughts during the site selection process on how they would be affected.
“The second thing they did was lie to us. They had to promote this as something that was green and Indigenous-led,” he said.
“The third element is railroading us. They’re pushing this as hard as they can push it on an unrealistic timeline so we don’t have the time to really even research the information fast enough.”
Rothfuss and Novak’s letter says in calling for cancellation of the project, they speak on behalf of the Protect the Chignecto Isthmus Coalition they have formed with 17 other organizations as well as many others that support it behind the scenes.
They write that all are concerned about the triple crisis of biodiversity loss, climate change and pollution outlined in Canada’s official 2030 Nature Strategy on halting and reversing the loss of diverse species in the natural world.
They also point to the 2007 report from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that identified the two most vulnerable locations in North America: New Orleans and the Chignecto Isthmus.
In an e-mail to Warktimes last week, a communications officer for the provincial environment department said Minister LePage would respond to the Rothfuss, Novak letter once the information in it had been “appropriately reviewed.”
To read the AWI letter, click here
With the release of the NSS (National Security Services) document that names Canada as a “Vassal” state, it’s time to push THAT specific narrative onto those who are in support of this project, and loudly state that we are CANADIANS, not some vassal of the US, and the US project is NOT welcome here ESPECIALLY now.
This plant will further the US’s claim over Canada and how can we allow this to happen?
NSS is “National Security Strategy” not “National Security Services”.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/2025-National-Security-Strategy.pdf
It’s a White House policy document, not a security agency. From the Trump White House, that means it’s full of blustering garbage, but I don’t see any mention of vassals in the document. It does promote the Monroe Doctrine of the Americas being the USA’s sphere of influence, and their right to interfere with the region.
It’s unlikely a gas powered generator next to Sackville will be seen by anyone as a step towards annexation. The more pertinent question is whether we want to be doing business with a US company while a hostile US government is inciting a trade war. Why not keep money in Canada, instead of sending it to the USA? Trump is positioning the USA as a national security threat to Canada. We should keep that in mind.
I stand corrected – “Strategy”, not Services.
Yes, it’s a White House Document, which I said. Whether it’s full of ‘blustering garbage’ or not, to ignore it is to – bluntly – ignore the real threat Trump and his people are. You may be fine with being a Chamberlain, but I am not.
It does not mention Canada as a vassal, but it clearly pushes that narrative and that’s the opinion of several people.
“Trump has mused about Canada becoming the 51st state. Since that is not going to happen, he will envision this country falling in line with the prescriptions of his new policy and becoming what is known as a “vassal” state, supplying a more powerful country with everything it wants, providing critical minerals and other essential materials, and buying American exports to keep people working in the US and profits up for American industries.” — Don Newman https://www.policymagazine.ca/trumps-nss-a-warning-to-the-world-a-threat-to-canada/
“Buck, who is now a senior fellow at the Graduate School of Public and International Affairs at the University of Ottawa, says the Americans could seek to turn Canada into a “vassal state,” offering military protection only if Canada helps further U.S. interests. ” — Canada’s former NATO ambassador, Kerry Buck https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/article/canadas-defence-minister-responds-to-trumps-new-national-security-strategy/
” A Note on the “Vassal State” Discourse — and Why It Resonates
Over the past few months, several commentators and policy writers have circulated the idea that Canada risks becoming a “vassal state” to the United States. Some of these pieces rely on historical analogies; others simply express frustration with Canada’s perceived strategic drift.
The 2025 National Security Strategy does not use that language.
It does not call Canada subordinate or dependent.
But the concern is not baseless.
The NSS reframes the Western Hemisphere as a zone of U.S. dominance.
It subtly positions Canada as defensive territory, not co-equal partner.
It treats Canadian resources as U.S. strategic assets.
And it casts divergence by allies as instability.
These are the structural markers political scientists use to describe a hierarchical alliance — the polite academic term that lives just a few shades short of vassalage.
The danger lies not in provocative rhetoric, but in the normalization of hierarchy.
When a country becomes expected to align, support, supply, and reinforce another’s strategy — without reciprocal influence — sovereignty becomes thinner with each passing cycle of policy.” — Peter Hillier/Halton https://medium.com/@pjhillier/when-partnership-turns-hierarchical-what-the-2025-u-s-79d526a6f167
The document is a modernization of the Monroe Doctrine, as you said, but to dismiss even this little bit of it is dangerous. Were this any other time, under any other President, I doubt there’d be any reason to worry. But now? This President, these people who have the power currently? A gas plant here, the Data Center in Lorneville. Add in other projects in other provinces we don’t know about, it’s at least worth to to be concerned about it.
The rest of your comment is exactly my point, I am just willing to believe it goes further than that and we’re closer to it, if we’re not careful, than we need to be. I would rather distrust the US right now and remove projects like this from being possible if they’re American backed, than to be seen as ‘owing’ later.
Again, First Nations do not have a seat at this table. They have zero influence, zero weight, and little ability or knowledge one way or the other. Not sure why they are included. So are we just adding just anyone who opposes this?
Oh Billy Boy, how I hope you are wrong. I’ve been thinking about your comment for a few days now. I normally don’t respond, but since nobody else has so far, I think I’ll weigh in.
You claim that First Nations have “zero influence, zero weight, and little ability one way or the other.” I hope you are wrong, although I notice NS Premier Tim Houston’s government appears to agree. Without consulting First Nations, his government reversed the ban on uranium exploration and mining; brought in a law to ban Indigenous protests to block clear-cutting on Crown land and called on the RCMP to crack down on non-government cannabis sales including shops on First Nations’ reserves. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/mi-kmaw-chiefs-tim-houston-claudia-chender-derek-mombourquette-cannabis-9.7012307
During his six years in office, I guess Blaine Higgs thought First Nations had “zero influence and zero weight” too when he abruptly cancelled shared gas-tax agreements without giving notice, launched a vigorous court challenge to land title claims resulting in yesterday’s ruling that J.D. Irving and two other big forestry companies are excluded from such claims and enthusiastically pushed for an end to the moratorium on fracking https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/chiefs-respond-higgs-comment-fracking-natural-gas-1.6840162
And I’m wondering if NB Power and PROENERGY didn’t agree with you too when they claimed, without any evidence, that the Mi’kmaq were investors in their gas plant and actually favoured the Centre Village site.
You may be wrong about one thing though Billy Boy. It looks like First Nations do have a seat at the table — but then again, only if they support burning fossil fuels and extracting mineral resources. Ford has his Ring of Fire, Holt has her Sisson mine, while Carney and Smith are pushing their new pipeline.
Oh, Billy Boy. When it comes to the continued existence of settler colonialism in Canada, you are scratching an open sore.