“Canada Levels 200 Charges Against ArcelorMittal in Fisheries Act Enforcement Blitz”

In a significant move to enforce environmental regulations, the Canadian government has laid 200 charges against ArcelorMittal Canada Inc., the Canadian subsidiary of the global steel giant, for alleged violations of the Fisheries Act. The charges, announced on April 30, 2025, stem from multiple investigations conducted by Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) into the company’s operations at the Mont-Wright mining complex and Fire Lake mine in Fermont, Quebec. These investigations, spanning incidents from May 2014 to June 2022, allege that ArcelorMittal permitted the deposit of deleterious substances into fish-bearing waterways, contravening subsection 36(3) of the Fisheries Act.

Background of the Case

The Fisheries Act is a cornerstone of Canada’s environmental legislation, designed to protect fish and their habitats by prohibiting the deposit of harmful substances into waters frequented by fish. Subsection 36(3) specifically bans the release of deleterious substances into such waters or any place where they may enter fish habitats. The charges against ArcelorMittal focus on alleged pollution incidents at the Mont-Wright mining complex, one of Canada’s largest open-pit iron ore deposits, and the nearby Fire Lake mine. These sites are located near ecologically sensitive waterways, including lakes Saint-Ange and Webb, which flow into the Moisie River—a critical habitat for Atlantic salmon and a proposed aquatic reserve.

The ECCC’s investigations were prompted by concerns over the company’s environmental practices, particularly following a history of non-compliance. ArcelorMittal Canada has faced scrutiny before, with a 2022 conviction resulting in a $15 million fine for 98 charges related to Fisheries Act and Metal Mining Effluent Regulations (MMER) violations between 2011 and 2013. That case involved 33 unauthorized deposits of toxic substances and misleading reporting practices, which obscured the extent of environmental harm.

Details of the 2025 Charges

The 200 charges laid in 2025 represent a substantial escalation in enforcement action against ArcelorMittal. According to ECCC, the charges relate to the deposit of deleterious substances—likely mining effluents containing toxic materials—into fish-bearing waterways. These incidents reportedly occurred over an eight-year period, highlighting what critics describe as systemic environmental mismanagement. The Mont-Wright complex, operational since 1974, has been a focal point for such concerns due to its proximity to vital aquatic ecosystems.

The charges are currently before the court and have not yet been proven. However, the scale of the allegations underscores Canada’s commitment to holding corporations accountable for environmental damage. Posts on X reflect public and media attention to the case, with users noting the government’s resolve to crack down on polluters.

ArcelorMittal’s History of Environmental Violations

This is not the first time ArcelorMittal Canada has faced legal consequences for environmental breaches. In 2022, the company and its partner, 7623704 Canada Inc., were fined $15 million for violations at Mont-Wright, including a 2012 dike rupture that released toxic substances into fish habitats. The court found that ArcelorMittal had concealed unauthorized deposits and provided false or misleading information to ECCC, violating subsection 63(1) of the Fisheries Act.

Additionally, in November 2024, ArcelorMittal Exploitation Minière Canada s.e.n.c. was fined $100,000 for obstructing ECCC enforcement officers between June and September 2022. The company refused to provide requested documents during an inspection, further straining its relationship with regulators. These repeated infractions have raised questions about ArcelorMittal’s environmental stewardship, especially as the company promotes itself as a leader in sustainable steel production.

Environmental and Community Impact

The alleged violations pose significant risks to the Moisie River ecosystem, one of North America’s largest Atlantic salmon rivers. The deposit of deleterious substances, such as mining effluents, can harm fish populations and disrupt aquatic ecosystems. In previous cases, ECCC used Daphnia magna, a sensitive freshwater crustacean, to test the toxicity of effluents, confirming their harmful impact. The fines from past convictions have been directed to the Environmental Damages Fund to support restoration projects, but critics argue that prevention, not just penalties, is needed to protect Canada’s waterways.

Local communities and environmental groups, such as the Quebec “Meilleure Mine” Coalition, have expressed frustration with ArcelorMittal’s track record. Ugo Lapointe, the coalition’s coordinator, previously criticized the company for contesting charges rather than addressing its environmental responsibilities. The latest charges are likely to intensify calls for stricter oversight of the mining industry.

Broader Implications for Canada’s Mining Sector

The case against ArcelorMittal reflects a broader trend of increased environmental enforcement in Canada. In 2021, Teck Coal was fined $60 million—the largest penalty under the Fisheries Act—for polluting rivers in British Columbia. Similarly, other mining companies, such as Cliffs Natural Resources, have faced multimillion-dollar fines for Fisheries Act violations. These high-profile cases signal that the Canadian government is prioritizing environmental accountability, particularly in industries with significant ecological footprints.

For ArcelorMittal, the charges could damage its reputation as it seeks to position itself as a “green” steel producer. The company’s Mount Wright mine has reserves for another three decades, making compliance with environmental regulations critical for its long-term operations. Failure to address these issues could lead to further fines, operational restrictions, or public backlash.

What’s Next?

As the 200 charges proceed through the courts, ArcelorMittal Canada faces a pivotal moment. The outcome of the case could result in substantial fines, potentially directed to the Environmental Damages Fund, and stricter regulatory scrutiny. The company may also face pressure to overhaul its environmental practices to prevent future violations. For now, the allegations remain unproven, but the scale of the charges underscores the seriousness of the accusations.

The Canadian government’s actions demonstrate a commitment to protecting the nation’s natural resources, particularly its fisheries, which are vital to both ecosystems and local economies. As the case unfolds, it will serve as a test of Canada’s ability to balance industrial growth with environmental stewardship.