APRIL 2012
EXAMINING AWA’S 2012 CONSERVATION PRIORITIES
+ s Editor: Ian Urquhart C ONTENTS Graphic Design: APRIL Marni Wilson Printing: Colour printing and process is sponsored FEATURES ASSOCIATION NEWS by Topline Printing
4 24 6 WILDERNESS WATCH
10 25
DEPARTMENTS 12 30 “Defending Wild Alberta through Awareness and Action”
16 Alberta Wilderness Association is a EVENTS charitable non-government organization dedicated to the completion of a 31 protected areas network and the conservation of wilderness throughout 31 ! "# # $ % $ & &'() )#! *+ ) & !&++ 19 403-283-2025 or contribute online & +* & +) "" !&
22 Wild Lands Advocate is published * (, +. / , " & . & *. +* & +) "" "" ! & " expressed by the authors in this publication are not necessarily those 1 ) " " 6 COVER PHOTO ) 7 ! $ ) &$ & !+ " & ) Alberta is blessed with many exceptional photographers and artists who + " "#*, ) ) &$ " & 1 , & # E F& $ +)+ 1 6 & . Please direct questions columnist for Outdoor Photography Canada, " 1 , " ""# S" ! and comments to: ! , " ! # ". 1 E F 1 E S" 6 & " ,&. * " & 9 :( ;:( < &$& $+&=" &$ !& $ +) "" " ! , #*"! " WLA are $30 per . & "#*"! * !&++ 9 :( ;:( < " +* & +) "" !&
FEATURED ARTIST This issue we are featuring some of the marvellous murals that fans of $ +) "" & & ) " & $ ++ 1 &+6& . $ & % . # " . ,#! 1 , & ) 11 . # & ) ) !& ) & # S" &"# "
' /:@; & &+6& . +* & B 403-283-2025 AWA respects the privacy of members. Lists are not sold or traded in any manner. AWA is a federally registered charity ++(1 (;//(: :( D : and functions through member and donor support. Tax-deductible donations may be made to AWA at Box 6398 Station $$$ +* & +) "" !& D, Calgary, AB T2P 2E1. Ph: 403-283-2025 Fax: 403-270-2743 E-mail: [email protected] www.AlbertaWilderness.ca &$&=" &$ !& @ (/ ;D POLITICAL ICE AGES: AVOIDED ONE, IN THE GRIP OF ANOTHER
Well my fellow conservationists, the Rubbish. Since when do radicals dress up political deck chairs on the good ship in business suits and legitimize our system Alberta have been re-arranged slightly for of government by wanting to participate in the next four years or so. In re-electing public environmental assessment hearings? Premier Redford’s Progressive Conservatives The simple, honest, answer is never - they Albertans rejected what I regard as a set of don’t. policies that promised to plunge this place This momentum to return to more into a political Ice Age. It’s generous, an neanderthal times also may be seen in understatement, to say there was very little Senator Nicole Eaton’s inquiry into the in the Wildrose Party’s 2012 environment money Canadian environmental charitable platform that valued the importance of wild groups receive from foreign foundations. spaces to who we are as a people in the 21st The vitriol found in the attacks Conservative Century. Senators Eaton and Finley launched on I look at Premier Redford’s party with Canadian environmental groups in the Senate - that chamber of “sober second two points. First, many progressive, thought” - probably warrant attaching environmentally-concerned Albertans “parental advisory” labels to their remarks strategically supported her party’s candidates (see the Senate debates of February 28th in this election. Second, many outside our and March 6th by following the “Previous borders are keenly interested in seeing Sittings - Debates” link at www.parl.gc.ca/ stronger environmental protection in Alberta. ParlBusiness.aspx?Language=E). That realization should encourage the Thankfully, some reason was shown Premier to be more ambitious when it by the Honourable Nancy Ruth, another comes to environmental protection than Conservative Senator, when she spoke to was indicated in her party’s election platform. Senator Eaton’s agenda on March 29th: We welcome the commitment to “full and “What is really being advocated is that some inclusive consultations” with respect to the Water for Life Strategy; we expect this should not. What is really being advocated will lead to a much-needed prioritization is that some points of view cannot be of ecological needs in a water allocation questioned, while others are a waste of time review and to a strong provincial wetland and cause delay.” Senator Ruth, by the way, policy that Albertans resoundingly supported supports Enbridge’s pipeline project. But, in past public consultations. We hope that unlike some of her Conservative colleagues environmental values will be upheld in in the Senate and House of Commons, regional land-use planning and in her party’s Senator Ruth’s support for pipelines hasn’t proposed changes to the regulatory process. led her to turn her back on fundamental If we may have avoided a provincial democratic principles. Ice Age on April 23rd I’m afraid we To say we will live in interesting are firmly in the grip of a federal one. and challenging times under these two The proposed muzzling of critics in the Conservative administrations is likely federal environmental assessment process, sparked by opposition to the Northern that in the pages of Wild Lands Advocate and Gateway pipeline proposal, illustrates through Alberta Wilderness Association’s this well. In January Natural Resources other educational and outreach activities Minister Joe Oliver portrayed, in his words, we will continue our efforts to inform our “environmental and other radical groups” (he audience about the importance of nature to didn’t have the courage to say First Nations) Alberta’s identity. as the enemies of Canadian families who want jobs and economic growth. - Ian Urquhart, Editor
BG H ' KN THE BROADER VIEW: AWA’S 2012 PRIORITIES
BY SEAN NICHOLS,
t the many outreach and education events AWA hosts, we are often Aasked what campaigns and efforts we are working on. As important as they all surely are, it is easy to become so intent on one or two trees that we could lose focus on the entire forest. We want to take this opportunity to step back and give you an idea of the issues that, taken as a whole, encompass the breadth of AWA’s work. Throughout the rest of this year Wild Lands Advocate will highlight the ten our conservation efforts in 2012. These priorities represent issues we know are of vital importance to the ecological health and natural well-being of Alberta. It is no easy task to narrow down all the work AWA is doing to just ten headlines. However this is part of the long-term planning we do at the beginning of every year, following the Annual General Meeting in November. After much discussion we select priorities based in part on their intrinsic importance to maintaining Alberta’s biodiversity, their achievability, the current momentum behind efforts to realize the goal, the familiarity of the broader Alberta public with the issue, and AWA’s historical interest. There clearly remain many other species, areas of concern and threats to Wild Alberta, and by no means will AWA ignore these. However of the association’s 2012 efforts to conserve Alberta’s wildlife, wild waters, and wild lands. We will be dividing our discussion of these top ten goals Wild Lands Advocate issues, tackling two goals per issue. This issue starts the discussion by focusing on the plight of two of Alberta’s most endangered species: the woodland caribou and the greater sage-grouse.
Woodland Caribou: Grey Ghosts of the Forest Across Canada, and particularly in Alberta, populations of woodland caribou ! " # $ % & ' has died out, another two are at “immediate risk of extirpation,” six are declining, six are unknown, and just three are reported to be stable. The greatest contributor to the decline of Alberta populations is cumulative habitat loss and degradation. The largest current threat to Alberta’s caribou is intensive oil sands exploration
4 WLA | + O + O Q K and extraction; studies show herds in the gas industry has caused the extirpation of lawsuit against the Minister in February. a species in Canada.” It is crucial that the Madeline Wilson writes about the ethical, the amount of industrial disturbances provincial and federal governments take organizational, and policy forces and as the average in all woodland caribou the steps necessary to prevent the imminent factors that affect and constrain sage- herds across Canada. Wolf culling is an extirpation of the sage-grouse in Alberta grouse conservation in her article. inappropriate and ecologically ineffective and Saskatchewan. Most importantly, management strategy in the absence no new development should be allowed Other Priorities of meaningful habitat protection and within critical sage-grouse habitat and all AWAs eight remaining priorities for restoration. AWA believes that sales of existing industrial infrastructure in that 2012 remain to have their stories told. energy leases in caribou ranges must stop, habitat must be removed. Some of them, such as obtaining protection and exploration and development of new In November 2011, AWA petitioned for grizzlies, are touched on in this issue industrial operations must be deferred in Federal Environment Minister Peter Kent of the WLA; others, such as the issues to recommend immediate action to protect surrounding the sale of Alberta’s public disturbed habitat is recovered to support Alberta’s most endangered species, as lands, have been discussed in prior issues. population recovery. he was required to do under the federal Others, for example the development of a In this issue of the WLA, Carolyn Species at Risk Act. Despite being given provincial biodiversity strategy, have yet Campbell writes in-depth about the federal months to respond, AWA has yet to to be showcased. Stay tuned for articles proposed woodland caribou recovery receive a response. Faced with this lack featuring all these priorities throughout strategy, and questions government of response, AWA along with Ecojustice the year’s remaining issues! reliance on the wolf cull as the sole means and three other ENGOs initiated a of “protecting” this threatened species. I follow this with a companion piece that explores an intriguing option proposed by a team of researchers at the University of Alberta that may see a way to protect to resource development. Finally, Adam Driedzic from the Environmental Law Centre contributes another piece to the woodland caribou jigsaw puzzle. Writing about OHV use and regulation, Adam touches on many themes related to land use planning in Alberta that also impact caribou herds.
Greater Sage-grouse: At Imminent Risk of Extirpation The highly endangered greater sage- grouse is an upland game bird iconic to Alberta’s dwindling native grasslands. In Alberta only 13 male sage-grouse were recorded on leks (mating grounds) in 2011, a 90 percent population decline since 1968. Based on the current trajectory of decline, experts have estimated that without immediate and drastic government action, the sage-grouse will be extirpated from Alberta within two years. Sagegrouse require large blocks of un-fragmented sagebrush grassland habitat to survive. Rapid population declines have occurred in response to habitat fragmentation primarily due to industrial and agricultural development in southern Alberta. According to sage- grouse scientist Dr. Mark Boyce, if sage- grouse disappear from the landscape it Winner: Family Category “Desulfovibrio desulfuricans” by Susann and Michael Lagore O BG H ' E SK V
Q K | + O + O WLA 5 CARIBOU HABITAT PROTECTION: IT’S URGENT TO REDUCE INDUSTRY’S BOOTPRINT
BY CAROLYN CAMPBELL,
ssentially zero – AWA has learned population trends are a barometer of boreal The plan also falls far short of this has been the calf survival rate forest intactness that affects many other promised responsible cumulative Ein Alberta’s Cold Lake woodland species. The barometer doesn’t suggest a effect management: it has neither land caribou herd for the last four years. This sunny tomorrow. disturbance limits nor a biodiversity is a shocking statistic. But it’s hardly The Alberta government’s woodland strategy; it protects bitumen rather surprising given the intensive in situ tar caribou Status Report (2010) showed than caribou. Meanwhile, both federal sands industry activity promoted in this population declines for almost all adult and provincial governments facilitate, caribou population’s range. In 2010, the boreal woodland caribou populations. The if not promote, as much new gas, oil, Alberta government’s caribou status Athabasca Landscape Team of scientists heavy oil and bitumen exploration and update report showed the Alberta side reported to the Alberta Caribou Committee development as the market will bear. As of the Cold Lake herd’s population was in 2009 that there was an urgent need of January 2012, 65 percent or 91,000 merely 20 percent of what it had been for both caribou habitat restoration and km2 of Alberta’s entire oil sands area in the mid-1990s; across the border mortality management measures to be was under bitumen lease. Global Forest in the comparatively less developed applied together, or caribou would not Watch Canada reported then that half of Saskatchewan side of the herd’s range the persist for more than several decades Alberta’s bitumen leases, as of July 2011, population was at 65 percent of its mid- # < were within caribou ranges. Industrial 1990s level (energy industry activity has recommendations: establish large industry- disturbances (buffered by 500 meters) greatly increased on the Saskatchewan free caribou recovery areas, coordinate cover an average 64 percent of the ranges side since 2007, with corresponding large scale habitat restoration programs, of the eight Alberta caribou populations in declines in caribou populations there). and reduce the new industrial footprint the bitumen sands region. What future is possible for this and in active lease areas. Their mortality other Alberta herds? Here we examine management recommendations were to Crying Wolf? the current state of provincial and federal kill at least two-thirds of wolves in an A wolf control program aimed at trying measures, including Alberta’s current area annually (stated as the most effective to protect the Little Smoky caribou herd wolf kill program in west central Alberta. mortality management strategy). The has been applied for six seasons now Meaningful habitat protection and possibility was raised of penning cows and in the west central Alberta foothills. restoration are notably absent from those calves although there were concerns about Predator management with strong measures. It is urgent that they be added. the value, feasibility and cumulative stress caveats was part of a provincial caribou Woodland caribou eat lichen and favour on the caribou of this latter approach. recovery plan developed by a team of large peat wetland areas and lichen-rich The years pass and there still has been government, industry and environmental old forests; these wet or snowy areas in representatives. The Alberta Government the intact boreal forest are inhospitable restoration – none, zero. The provincial adopted most of this plan in 2005 as to other prey species such as deer and government’s Lower Athabasca regional Alberta’s Woodland Caribou Recovery moose. Such an intact, unfragmented land-use plan in northeastern Alberta Plan; the one recommendation it did not landscape helps to separate the caribou remains a proposal only. It timidly proposes adopt, unfortunately, was a temporary from wolves and bears. Today, seismic that caribou range protected from industry moratorium on new mineral and lines, well sites, camps, forestry cutblocks rise from the current seven percent to about forestry leases in the lands used by the and busy roads fragment huge, growing 17 percent of caribou range in that region. Little Smoky and two other Alberta swaths of Alberta’s boreal forest. With this But this expansion only may be allowed at caribou herds then at immediate risk of industrial “disturbance,” deer and moose the fringes of bitumen deposits. According local extinction. The 2005 Plan stated are drawn into previously inaccessible to Environment Canada, woodland caribou bluntly that “habitat conservation and forest in unprecedented numbers and wolf require 65 percent intact habitat to have a management is the fundamental tool to populations grow accordingly. In addition, 60 percent chance of survival. The Lower reduce undue predation on caribou.” It cutlines and roads give wolves and bears Athabasca plan would be a very modest added that predator control “must be easy access, easy pathways, to caribou. improvement over the status quo but will predicated on land management and Sadly, predation on adult and young > habitat restoration procedures (appropriate caribou is unsustainably high. Caribou survival prospects. for caribou recovery) being in place, or
/ WLA | + O + O Q K The current extent of industrial disturbance in caribou ranges in Alberta’s oil sands region makes it urgent to establish land disturbance limits and strong habitat protection and restoration measures. Map: Global Forest Watch Canada, 2012. under development,” that “there is strong ' result of avoiding the complete loss social reluctance to rely on this tool,” and annual survival of caribou calves and of a caribou population by allowing that “predator control will not succeed as adults improved greatly. The caribou the population to be stable or to grow; a sole, or predominant, tool for caribou population stabilized and began to grow; predator management should be effective recovery.” it is now believed to be about 80 animals. or not done at all.” The government’s I spoke to Dave Hervieux, the Provincial “That is a success”, Hervieux states. “It is approach targets whole packs rather than Caribou Management Coordinator best to retain caribou within their range, disrupting pack structure and thereby in Alberta Sustainable Resource as population re-establishment after local stimulating wolf reproduction. Simply Development, for information on the extinction is unproven and would be trapping would play this stimulating role. Little Smoky caribou recovery program. @ P The government relies on helicopters to He stated categorically that “without Hervieux strongly defends the elements shoot wolves from the air for most of the wolf control, the Little Smoky caribou of the Little Smoky predator management kills. But this method requires optimal herd would have been completely lost by program; from 2005 to 2012 this program snow and visibility conditions to spot and now.” Due to forestry and energy industry has killed about 650 wolves. First, he follow tracks. disturbances attracting deer, moose and notes that the only responsible way to So for some of the kills, Hervieux states wolves, the Little Smoky population had manage predators is comprehensively, that they rely on trained professional staff declined by between 10 and 20 percent so it will actually stabilize caribou for a tightly regulated poison (strychnine) every year from the late 1990s to the mid populations. He states that “there is no bait program – about 100 wolves have been 2000s. Wolf control for Little Smoky point to control wolves if it is done in a killed this way since 2005. To minimize began in the winter of 2005/06. From manner that will not achieve the desired collateral damage and accidentally killing
Q K | + O + O WLA D other species, the only poisoned baits are small bait pieces buried in the snow that only canine species could be expected < While Dave Hervieux is scientifically correct to observe public warning signs. “The only way that the wolf kills have temporarily kept caribou on the Little for someone’s dog to be affected is for Smoky landscape, he knows that it has also allowed Alberta to the owner to allow them to run loose in ' continue to develop new all-season roads, grant new subsurface be happening,” states Hervieux. The larger leases and generally do nothing to protect caribou habitat. bait that draws ravens and in turn attracts Despite some deferrals, logging proceeded in the name of wolves and other species to the site is not poisoned. Accidental mortality of other mountain pine beetle control and against the original advice of species is carefully tracked and thankfully the landscape planning team. AWA will not collaborate in such so far has been very low. For example, a charade. Caribou habitat is being lost at an alarmingly fast rate for 1,041 bait-site-days in the 2011-2012 and the short-term success from shooting wolves reinforces winter season, there were 23 accidental ' government complacency about actually protecting caribou poisonings, and one red fox mortality. habitat from further industrial incursion. This is a recipe for Hervieux says this data is very comparable failure of epic proportions. R In defending the Little Smoky wolf Killing wolves takes everyone’s eye off the real problem. control program, Hervieux underlines that - Cliff Wallis, 2nd Vice President, Alberta Wilderness Association the wolf kill is not intended to be the sole caribou management tool. He notes that the recent caribou policy adopted by the provincial government in June 2011 lists an immediate priority to maintain caribou wolves have been scapegoated while This proposal was four years overdue habitat. But Hervieux is adamant that industrial expansion, the root cause of – imagine how much Alberta’s caribou some wolf control work is necessary along caribou decline, is let off the hook. herds shrank while Ottawa sat on its with habitat protection and restoration. hands. Environment Canada received “Without the ability to use focused, careful Can Ottawa and Edmonton Learn from 14,000 submissions and the latest and effective predator management as one B.C.? of the caribou management tools, many Some elements of British Columbia’s strategy will be released in June 2012. woodland caribou populations in Alberta 2011 caribou plan show more promise The proposed strategy (covered in more will not survive much longer. We would than the current ambiguities of Alberta’s depth in the October 2011 issue of WLA) consciously be choosing for extirpation caribou policy. In 2010, B.C. deferred for categorized the seven Alberta herds most of caribou populations if we choose not affected by habitat destruction to date as to employ careful predator management. in 5,500 km2 of three caribou population “non-essential” to the task of maintaining The problem is that without a relief from ranges. There are also constraints on overall population connectivity. excessive mortality levels, most caribou forestry and gravel/sand mining leases Continued destruction of up to 95 percent populations will not persist until habitat in these same areas. The Ministry of of their habitat would be allowed if is adequately restored.” Hervieux states Forests, Lands and Natural Resources provinces “provide a plan that will support that since the Little Smoky wolf control will set performance measures to track the stabilised local populations through the program began there has been very little impacts of lease deferral. The B.C. plan use of mortality and habitat management new forestry industry footprint in the more is far from perfect overall, as it facilitates tools.” This means killing wolves at an intact parts of the Little Smoky caribou energy development in most caribou range unprecedented scale, as Environment ' areas by over-emphasizing industrial Minister Peter Kent acknowledged in from what company cutting plans might best practices already demonstrated to early September 2011 after the proposed otherwise have been. be ineffective as sole management tools. strategy’s release. This is deeply unethical AWA decided it could not support However, the lease deferral element shows in the absence of any attempt to halt new the wolf kill in the Little Smoky range foresight and should also be applied in habitat destruction or restore degraded Alberta. habitat. ' Strong leadership on caribou protection The draft strategy’s weakness is oil and gas leasing, exploration and should come from Ottawa. The federal detailed in an important submission development have continued unabated. government should uphold Canada’s to Environment Canada authored by While some forestry cuts have been Species at Risk Act provisions, but this has 11 scientists (Schmiegelow, Crichton, deferred, no new protected areas have not happened to date. Public comments Hebblewhite et al.). Notably the authors been created to ensure long-term caribou closed on the proposed federal caribou are advisors to Environment Canada’s habitat recovery. Our perspective is that recovery strategy on February 22, 2012. own Boreal Caribou Science Management
8 WLA | + O + O Q K Scientists emphasize that there is no evidence that the recovery of Alberta caribou populations is not biologically and technically feasible. BG H ' B K G
Committee. They state there is no AWA’s own submission to Environment northeastern Alberta). In 2011, the Lower O Z Canada on the strategy was skillfully Athabasca Regional Advisory Council essential” categorization. To the contrary, prepared by EcoJustice, and included recommended that less than 15 percent they note that so-called “non-essential” legal and ecological reasons why the of a multi-use industry zone be disturbed West Side of Athabasca River, East Side of Species at Risk Act at any one time by active bitumen Athabasca River, and Cold Lake Alberta requirements. It was legal action by AWA, leases. In each case, lobbying by a few populations are actually connected to EcoJustice, the Pembina Institute and companies seemed to veto these broadly- the “essential” Red Earth population. several Alberta First Nations that forced supported proposals. That this should be They add that the expected contraction Environment Canada to release its long- unacceptable is obvious to AWA given in “non-essential” caribou habitat range overdue draft recovery strategy; AWA the overwhelming evidence of industrial due to weak recovery requirements will continue to examine legal options for responsibility for caribou population means the strategy would likely not meet improved caribou management. declines and the urgency to act. its stated objective to maintain caribou There are still important opportunities across the range of ecological conditions How Many Tomorrows Remain for to protect habitat by halting new leasing in within their distribution in Canada. Alberta’s Woodland Caribou? caribou ranges. There are also still prime < O protection opportunities, for example in that recovery of local populations is not and restoration remains urgent. There are the non-bitumen areas of Cold Lake Air biologically and technically feasible.” still important opportunities to achieve Weapons Range (and see Sean Nichols’ After noting that a recovery strategy is this. Sensible land disturbance limits have article describing an important study of Z been twice proposed by multi-stakeholder how much Alberta caribou range can assessments, separate from socio- groups with ample forestry and energy still be protected at very low natural economic considerations that occur later industry representation. In 2008, the resource value opportunity cost). If these with the action plans, they point out that Cumulative Environmental Management opportunities are not taken very soon, overlap of the “non-essential” population Association’s terrestrial ecosystem nearly all of Alberta’s caribou will die ranges with areas of high economic value working group proposed that active oil out in our lifetime, an entirely predictable suggests that socio-economic factors sands leases be limited to less than 15 and preventable result of irresponsibly wrongly entered into this recovery percent of the Regional Municipality of managed resource industry development. strategy. Wood Buffalo (which covers most of Surely this species deserves better.
Q K | + O + O WLA @ A GLASS HALF-FULL: BY SEAN NICHOLS, AVOIDING PROTECTION PARALYSIS
t is easy to give in to despair when still allow no more than a two percent cost Alberta’s introduction in 2008 of the Land- considering the circumstances of to resource development opportunities. use Framework (LUF), and the planning IAlberta’s woodland caribou and Considered in the context of the process behind its implementation. As the response from government, both prevailing thinking about caribou habitat part of that process the authors met with provincial and federal. Reading articles conservation in Alberta–that any progress ^_` ' such as Carolyn’s piece above, one begins toward that goal must necessarily go the Boreal Caribou Committee (now to wonder if there is any political will hand-in-hand with a substantial restriction the Alberta Caribou Committee). They to address the root causes of population on industrial development–this must prepared the 2010 report, Identifying decline or if we will instead remain locked be seen as an optimistic viewpoint. Conservation Area Options in Alberta in a paralyzing spiral of studying, Using an Optimization denying and sidestepping until Approach, with the aim of there are simply no more caribou proposing a new strategy for left and the problem “goes away” identifying conservation areas on its own. to be included in the LUF. This is, to be sure, a glass- Previous methods for half-empty way of looking at the selecting woodland caribou situation. However as the appeal conservation targets and to such an analogy implies, it priorities had focused on is not the only available lens. those herds most vulnerable to Organizations such as Global extirpation, such as the Little Forest Watch Canada and the Smoky herd in west central Environmental Law Centre react Alberta. Today, those highly to the situation by reaching vulnerable herds are found different, more optimistic in regions where caribou are conclusions. most greatly threatened by One such conclusion is neatly industrially-related habitat encapsulated by a pair of reports disturbances and where consequently the cost associated with the University of Alberta. with protecting caribou range Richard Schneider, Grant Hauer, rises sharply with the amount Stan Boutin et. al. propose a (in area) of the range to be method for selecting woodland protected. This has led to the caribou reserves that optimizes current paralyzing situation based on the impact that the where there is an apparent establishment of these reserves political reluctance to take steps would have on Alberta’s resource toward meaningful caribou development opportunities. From conservation through critical their research, they reach an habitat protection, as opposed astonishing conclusion: to band-aid approaches, like Up to half of Alberta’s Winner: Winner: Adult Category “Our Precious” by The Dunford Clan wolf culls, that at best make Scramblers (Heather Hadden, Sarah Woolgar, Mary-Jo Woolgar) woodland caribou range can overtures toward addressing BG H ' E SK V be protected with a merely one secondary or tertiary threats. percent cost to resource development This is especially true when keeping in The report in question instead uses opportunities. mind the allowances made by the 2011 a strategy that optimizes for cost, as Furthermore, this includes protecting Proposed Federal Woodland Caribou measured by the “proportion of net present 50 percent of grizzly habitat lying within Recovery Strategy. That strategy states value (NPV) of petroleum and forestry Alberta’s public lands, 50 percent of the that for caribou herds at the greatest risk resources within the conservation area [ # \[ # ] of extinction (which include seven of system as a proportion of the total NPV in same, and 50 percent of Alberta’s Alberta’s 12 remaining herds) critical of the study area,” with the total study headwaters. The latter three targets habitat could be allowed to dwindle to as area being all public lands in the forested can be increased to 80 percent, though R region of Alberta. admittedly keeping the woodland caribou The impetus behind the papers that claim It should be noted here that the NPV range protection target at 50 percent, and these conclusions was the government of (in both this paper, and the one discussed
10 WLA | + O + O Q K below) includes the projected value of risk to caribou from predator species like caribou range protection would be @ wolves. that economic value currently being The results of the paper paint much quo, resource development opportunities @ { O the same picture as that in the former percent of total NPV” is expressed below, report: 50 percent of Alberta’s caribou we as a province would then be able to it is understood as referring to one percent range, by area, can be protected with consider what the next steps should be. It of all value that could be expected to be only a one percent cost to total NPV. If would be an altogether better position than derived from known resource deposits. the requirement to include all natural | Z subregions is dropped and the requirement However the opportunity to take that were added to this base optimization to minimize risk factors is slightly relaxed, ! target. These include requirements for relative to minimizing cost, then this one of Alberta’s remaining herds has a representation of all natural subregions; protection target can be increased to 60 population reported to be stable; all others for minimization of linear feature density percent of caribou ranges, by area, while are in decline, some quite rapidly so. If we (referring to roads, pipelines, etc.); for keeping costs to roughly one percent of do not take action soon, the pessimistic inclusion of caribou and grizzly range; total NPV. view of the half-empty glass will become for inclusion of ESAs; for inclusion of It should be noted that these protection Z foothills headwaters; and for promotion of targets, of 50 percent and 60 percent of caribou populations drop past the point conservation area “clumping,” an attribute caribou range, are not equal across the where any level of habitat protection that in turn encourages large, cohesive province and across all herds. Some herds and well-connected conservation areas. such as the Yates and Caribou Mountain extirpation. By adding or removing these restrictions herds in the far north of the province would This raises the question of what the in various combinations, the authors see 100 percent of their habitat protected government response to research of this were able to select a set of conservation by this approach, while others such as the nature has been. Unfortunately it is hard areas that maximize caribou habitat already highly-threatened Little Smoky to tell. The multi-stakeholder Boreal representation while minimizing NPV ' Caribou Committee, which includes cost and the impact on potential economic not see much of their range protected at representatives from Alberta Energy activity. all. and Alberta Sustainable Resource It was found that a well-connected However to conclude from this that Development, received a presentation system of conservation areas that includes such a strategy is not worth considering is on the initial report. Six months later the a 50 percent coverage of each of woodland to miss the point. Alberta government distilled this, along caribou range, grizzly range, ESAs and That point, put bluntly, is that in the with however many other inputs, into “A foothills headwaters within the study area current climate of inaction, no further Woodland Caribou Policy for Alberta”, resulted in a net impact on one percent of caribou habitat in Alberta is being protected a two-page glossy brochure in which it total NPV. Increasing all area coverage anywhere, at all. R restrictions, except for caribou range, to Every single one of Alberta’s 12 research. 80 percent resulted in a net impact on two There is little question that there are percent of total NPV. as Non-Self-Sustaining in the federal some in the Alberta government who truly The encouraging results of this report proposed recovery strategy. In the name of have the best of intentions regarding the led to a second paper, this one more tightly industrial development every single one is province’s threatened species, including focused on the issue of caribou habitat likely to suffer the same fate recently met the woodland caribou. However it seems protection as opposed to the selection of by the Banff herd: extirpation. [ more broad-based conservation areas. What research like these two papers that, for the time being, at least, the glass Selection of Reserves for Woodland shows is that there are clear starting points really is half full. Caribou Using an Optimization Approach for pulling ourselves out of this morass. was published in PLoS ONE, an open Rather than the status quo, which sees Sources: } ' ~ us shrugging our collective shoulders, The Proposed Federal Woodland Caribou This latter research used a similar declaring that woodland caribou cannot be Recovery Strategy can be found at http:// modelling and optimization approach to protected without invoking “unacceptable” www.sararegistry.gc.ca/document/ dspDocument_e.cfm?documentID=2253 impacts on economic activity, and using parameters to maximize representation this declaration as an excuse to ignore Identifying Conservation Area Options in of all natural subregions in Alberta and to ' Alberta Using an Optimization Approach minimize habitat reserve overlap with areas we can change our strategies and protect can be found at http://www.biology.ualberta. exhibiting high incidence of additional @ ca/faculty/stan_boutin/ilm/uploads/pdfs/ risk factors affecting caribou viability. To do so would not necessarily, as $ # & } Z Z Such risk factors include projected effects Schneider et. al. demonstrate, incur of climate change and high densities of Selection of Reserves for Woodland Caribou white-tailed deer. White-tails were chosen opportunities at all. In essence, to mangle Using an Optimization Approach can be found at http://www.plosone.org/article/ for indicating anthropogenic alterations a metaphor, we would get to have our land info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal. in forest structure. Such alterations in and eat it too. pone.0031672 structure may also lead to an increased # > '
Q K | + O + O WLA 11 ATV ROUNDUP: MANAGING MOTORIZED RECREATION IN ALBERTA
BY ADAM DRIEDZIC,
Powder paradise? Look twice. This cutline in the Ghost PLUZ goes straight through the BG H ' V
12 WLA | + O + O Q K low knowledge who take the historic watershed there were 15 centime- frontier as a contemporary entitlement. Where is the ATV industry? Ttres of fresh snow on the ground This is often how ATVs are marketed: go and it was still falling. The only other ve- anywhere, blast a creek, blaze a trail. If Commercial guides and hicle going my way was hauling a “quad” this is the new Wild West, it is due for a outfitters are regulated (All-Terrain Vehicle, or ATV), which re- real cost accounting. Hunting and fishing require licenses. one of the most popular areas on the East- ATV Users who Destroy the Environment ern Slopes. The law states that we are all Should Pay the Price Bicycle races use waivers welcome on public land, but assumptions ! and insurance. persist that some users are more welcome Park campgrounds are run than others. impacts. ATV management concerns by private contractors. My companion stood inside a track both. Non-motorized recreationalists Public ski areas charge that looked like a tunnel and pondered, are displaced by noise, air emissions, fees for trail maintenance. “How deep is this rut? Where did all the and crowds. Ranchers face damage to dirt go?” The answer is to follow the trail fencing and from wildlife driven onto downhill into the water. ATV management private land. The resource industries face is a true sustainability issue. It requires damage to facilities and potential liability Watershed Cumulative Effects Study is understanding social, economic, and for hazards. Ironically, efforts to reclaim that recreationalists of all types prefer environmental factors as much as it industrial roads can make them impassable mature forests and aesthetic landscapes requires law and policy. Fortunately, to anyone without an ATV. (ALCES Group, 2011). When an area recreation is something that Albertans Environmental impacts are felt on land, gets degraded the recreationalists move understand. As for law and policy, water, and wildlife. Soil gets compacted on, no matter who caused the damage. A this article provides a roundup of hot or eroded, causing loss of native plants second fact is that most recreationalists topics from Environmental Law Centre and room for weeds. Natural water storage prefer a good trail to any old track. ATVs interviews and presentations leading into do not need to be everywhere so much the 2012 ATV season. The comments and as they need somewhere to go. It might questions are real, but more importantly, habitat. Terrestrial species experience be possible to reduce the environmental so are the ideas and solutions. habitat fragmentation and disrupted impacts of ATV use and improve the life cycles. I’ve been told that everyone experience for all users at the same time. If Address Culture blames quadders for something. so, recreation is the dark horse of land use ATVs are not indigenous to Alberta but planning in Alberta. Most of the attention many of the issues are homegrown. Trail Everybody’s Got a Footprint goes to extractive industries, but they all sports follow in the footprint of natural The human element of ATV issues % resource extraction. Linear disturbances > the health of the land. like pipelines, logging roads, and cut lines Recreationalists are an exceptionally provide physical access to the landscape. diverse and decentralized sector. Strategic Are Quads Allowed to Tear Up Public In Alberta, new linear disturbances are alliances are uncommon, even where Land? being created at a faster rate than old ones the appetite for new solutions is high. Physical access and legal access are are being reclaimed. Motorized recreation Motorized and non-motorized users different. It is simply hard to see under the @ may agree about respecting the land current system. Infrequent enforcement why it is more popular in Alberta than other but disagree on access privileges. This provinces and countries. The dollars spent is not simply a case of “tree huggers” lay down the law of public land use. In are largely retained. Albertans make most versus “trail shredders.” Motorized Atlantic Canada, where cultural use of of their leisure trips in-province and trips users can have divergent interests as public land is much older, the courts have for ATV use are made relatively closer to well. Snowmobilers and quadders have been clear that there is no common law home (Travel Activities and Motivation been known to go to court over seasonal right to quad (R v. Tucker; R. v. Lambe). Survey; Alberta Leisure Travel Intentions access (New Brunswick Federation of Recreational access is a privilege under Study). Today’s ATV craze might best be Snowmobile Clubs et al. v. New Brunswick government policies and legislation. understood as an echo boom industry. All-Terrain Vehicle Federation). ATV The main access policies in Alberta Now consider social change. Access to users are often more willing to share the are Access Management Plans (AMPs). public land is the historic norm, supports land but more likely to impact other users AMPs are not enforceable. This is not rural living, and is considered part of our and the environment. Furthermore, the necessarily bad because AMPs are not heritage by many. For recreationalists, most troublesome individuals might be planned trail systems. Most AMPs were this heritage involves free, random use. # created following Integrated Resource But as Alberta booms, many of the moral judgments on all sides and the result Management Plans. They basically allow newest generation of outdoor lovers is polarized positions. for ATV use on existing linear disturbances. haven’t seen the changes that have been What all stakeholders do share are This method of coordinating multiple occurring on the landscape. The worst- land uses to avoid new disturbances is ! “Integrated Land Management” (ILM).
Q K | + O + O WLA 13 Black Creek Heritage Rangeland: multiple-use, shared management, and a model for the future? BG H ' V
Traditional ILM works much better with # No motorized use unless authorized, the environmental impacts of one land use the resource industries than recreation. # Motorized use on designated trails while allowing others to continue. Industrial disturbances were simply not and areas only, and Every one of the above zoning options made for sustained or enjoyable use. # No motorized use within 100m of could permit or prohibit ATVs. In As a result, recreationalists destroy or lakeshores. short, form is not substance. Protective abandon existing disturbances and make The new regulation will also allow for designations do not necessarily prohibit new tracks. Tracks inside the AMP area new recreational designations including ATV use any more than their absence proliferate to the point where users who areas and trails for non-motorized use. guarantees ATV use. What might matter want to be responsible don’t know where The Public Lands Act is not the only more is who is in charge. to ride. Newer AMPs in the Ghost and option for ATV zoning. Wildland Parks > can create ATV trails on historic routes disturbances as trails. However, new while prohibiting new access roads. Imagine that someone asked you to AMPs can still enable an expansion of Heritage Rangelands can create ATV control quadding. What would you need the OHV footprint. If AMPs provide that trails that do not undermine grassland to do your job? closures be compensated by new trails and ecology and grazing operations. ATV First you need a mandate: it actually has that good behavior can lead to new trails zoning can also be steered by regional to be your job. Government departmental then there is no incentive for trails to be plans under the Land-use Framework. silos are an issue. The ATV debate reduced. The two regional plans in progress to date concerns the environmental impacts AMPs are supported by enforceable are providing recognition for the value of of recreation but the lead government zoning legislation. The legislation varies the recreation industry and the landscape department is neither Environment nor with the type of land. Agricultural public upon which it depends. The draft Lower Recreation. Access to most public lands lands require that users seek the consent Athabasca Regional Plan (LARP) is managed by Sustainable Resource of agricultural lease holders under provides for new motorized recreation Development (SRD). SRD recognizes that the Recreational Access Regulation. areas and asserts that motorized recreation resource development and recreational use For forested land, the approach as of is compatible with all proposed PLUZs pose different challenges. SRD’s mandate September 2011 is Public Land Use and Wildland Parks. Contentiously, the comes from the Public Lands Act, which Zones (PLUZs). PLUZs include existing motor-accessible PLUZs and Wildland lacks clear provisions for environmental Forest Land Use Zones and are now Parks are designated conservation areas. protection or recreational service delivery. part of the Public Lands Administration An alternative that has been allowed for, The department of Tourism, Parks and Regulation under the Public Lands Act. but which has yet to be seen in regional Recreation (TPR) has the opposite issue. The level of ATV use in existing zones planning is a “conservation directive” to The Provincial Parks Act provides a varies immensely, from none to seasonal protect “environmental, natural scenic, clear mandate to preserve ecologically to being the purpose of the zone. The esthetic, and agricultural values” (Alberta important landscapes and facilitate their ' Land Stewardship Act, section 37). This use for recreation, but TPR does not including: new designation could potentially regulate manage access to lands where most ATV
14 WLA | + O + O Q K use occurs. PLUZs are managed by SRD, Can You Give the Whole Place Over to Wildland Parks are managed by TPR, and Somebody? ATV management outside the Heritage Rangelands are managed by a Recreational management provides government box: combination of the two. countless opportunities for non- You also need tools: ways to regulate government involvement. The lack of a The Eagle Point - Blue user behavior and change cultural values. Rapids Parks Council is a The current issue is not lack of tools mandate could warrant delegating multi-stakeholder partnership. as much as lack of directions on their the authority to manage trails to an The Bighorn Backcountry use. The Public Lands Administration independent agency. The draft LARP Regulation creates one stop shopping for contemplates this arrangement. User Monitoring Group was ! ' groups can greatly assist with trail a 2011 Emerald Award designate open trails, and issue orders, planning, construction, maintenance, Recipient. especially in PLUZs. ATV tour companies and decommissioning. Perhaps the peer The Ironhorse Trail uses and rally organizers should note that #< municipal land administered the new regulation opens the door to O P by a joint company. permit requirements for commercial and user agreements. Watershed stewardship Reclaimed gravel pits and recreational users. landfills are leased for The hottest provision might be section pursue citizen policing and education motorsport tracks. 43, which prohibits motorized vehicles programs. The local nature of motorized in permanent, natural water bodies unless recreation suggests a role for municipal you have a “lawful right” to be there. The service providers. Any form of user-pay problem is that some designated PLUZ experience could create opportunities for like that? Design industrial disturbances trails go through water bodies. There is the private sector. for environmentally sustainable trails and also mud bogging in wetlands that may close the bad tracks. Don’t use recreation not be “permanent.” Allowing PLUZs Can ATVs Be Restricted to Playground as an excuse to avoid reclamation, but to trump the water prohibition could Areas? begin with the end in mind. undermine the regulation and reduce the Once you have the management pieces, value of PLUZs for conservation areas. the question becomes what to manage? It Will Have to Be a Homegrown Solution Poorly planned PLUZ trails could enable This brings us back to access plans Addressing ATV issues takes a lot of greater ATV impacts than with no zoning and zoning. The conventional debate pieces: sound policies and clear legislation, at all. It would help to bring AMPs and is between “extensive” and “intensive” empowered management, some willing PLUZs in line with the intention of the recreation. Extensive recreation involves hands and a better disturbance model. It regulation and to provide direction on that long trips in the backcountry. Dispersing might help to look at practices elsewhere. the users disperses their impacts and The right practices will be those that shift Finally, you need capacity. Enforcement ' human values and recognize the diversity is a massive challenge with very few anywhere and enforcement is impossible. of Alberta’s public land culture. ' ' Extensive recreation requires a low < > $ > % number of users with high knowledge and Heritage Rangeland I saw what I was compliant behavior. Intensive recreation looking for - one designated ATV trail, and it is time to revitalize enforcement. restricts users to dedicated facilities with up on a dry, scenic ridge, avoiding the This could involve a collaboration of clear boundaries. The area in bounds is working ranches and wet valleys below. < impacted but protecting the remainder is Clear signage directed motorized users Public Lands Act and Forests Act enable easier. This is the root of proposals like past several healing scars and into Bob turning reclaimed oil sand mines into Creek Wildland Park. The sign I read ' %' <&%' ATV parks. Intensive recreation helps said that ATV management in Alberta is RCMP were placed under the Solicitor control the masses but many users will not legally possible. General – the department responsible for law enforcement. Whether more AMPs and PLUZs are a compromise enforcement will follow is unknown. of sorts. At best they allow extensive use Limited capacity can be addressed within an intensive area. At worst they - Adam Driedzic is Staff Counsel with the in ways that haven’t been attempted. allow intensive use of an extensive area. Environmental Law Centre (ELC). The Mandatory operator licenses or access The next step is to replace compromise ELC is a charity with a mission to ensure > with win-win. Consider the Canmore that Alberta’s laws, policies, and legal countless users before they hit the trails. Nordic Centre: a world class user-pay trail processes sustain a healthy environment $ facility and a Provincial Park. Who can for future generations. Adam works out back into management programs or by tell that it was a coal mine? Resort towns of Canmore with a focus on the Eastern letting concerned citizens conduct private got lucky because historic disturbances Slopes. prosecutions. In any event, government were apt to snake through the hills rather will need outside help. than tear them down. But why not plan
Q K | + O + O WLA 15 CONSTRAINED CONSERVATION: EXAMINING LEGAL, POLICY, AND ORGANIZATIONAL OBSTACLES TO SAGE-GROUSE BY MADELINE WILSON, CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY IN ALBERTA
e all wonder why government meaningful action to protect and recover \$! [{ $] R this endangered prairie icon. More sage-grouse as an Endangered species in W @ ' 1998. provide them with. Is misunderstanding public documents such as legislation, Yet it is now 2012 and neither the root cause? Undoubtedly, even if all government policy, business plans, and provincial nor federal governments have involved parties are presented with the existing research; she describes the taken any meaningful steps to protect same information different conclusions regulatory and management context of sage-grouse or the habitat upon which its may be reached and contrary decisions Alberta’s land and resource system; and survival depends. For those unfamiliar may be made. In her paper Constrained she interviews members of the government with this saga, it is one that continues Conservation: Examining Legal, Policy, ministries directly responsible for land to have all those involved scratching (or and Organizational Obstacles to Sage- and resource management decisions banging) their heads, wondering what grouse Conservation and Recovery in affecting greater sage-grouse protection angle, tactic or combination of words will Alberta, Candice Cook set out to closely and recovery. < @ environmental law group Ecojustice is recovery. She examined the space where Sage-grouse on the Brink currently representing AWA and several ' ' The current state of the greater sage- other conservation groups as we pursue and where, more often than not, the health grouse in Alberta presents an exemplary legal action against federal Environment case study to examine this “task Minister Peter Kent over his continued serve some other good; this is what I refer environment.” Over the last two decades, failure to protect Canada’s endangered to as the “space in-between.” the sage-grouse population has been greater sage-grouse. This current legal Past experience repeatedly reveals decimated. Last spring, only 13 male sage- battle marks the species’ second Federal that identifying the ecological factors grouse were recorded on leks in Alberta. Court appearance in the last three years. contributing to species decline and In neighbouring Saskatchewan, the only developing the necessary management other Canadian province in which sage- Interview Results regime is only one step towards species grouse can still be found, populations In order to explore fully the regulatory conservation and recovery. Cook’s were only slightly higher. These dismal environment in which decisions regarding work emphasizes that conservation and counts represent an almost 90 percent sage-grouse conservation are made, Cook recovery strategies must be supported by population collapse in Canada between interviewed representatives from relevant the institutional and land management 1988 and 2006. In Canada, populations government ministries, departments, and context in which they are implemented; persist only in the extreme southeastern departmental divisions. The apparent effective solutions depend on much corner of Alberta and southwestern corner themes and direct excerpts from these more than good science (all subsequent of Saskatchewan. interviews provide seldom-heard insights quotations are taken from Cook’s thesis): The survival of the sage-grouse is into the organizational structure, culture “Although biologists and species experts intimately connected to the health and and politics of species conservation. They are often tasked with prescribing solutions presence of silver sagebrush (Artemisia offer a rare glimpse into the obstacles and strategies for conservation and cana) ' faced by those working on-the-ground. In recovery, it is bureaucrats and politicians Region. Sage-grouse is a species that, due total 26 key informants were interviewed, who make the ultimate management to a strong reliance on a diminishing and including representatives from Parks decisions.” (p.3). ' Canada, Agriculture and Agri-Food This broader context, referred to by existing habitat, and a small population Canada, Environment Canada, Alberta some scholars as the “task environment,” on the brink of disappearance, desperately Sustainable Resource Development, includes the ethical, organizational and needs human intervention to prevent its Alberta Environment, the Energy policy forces and factors that affect extinction from Canada (extirpation). Resources Conservation Board and the the work of endangered species. Cook Alberta designated the sage-grouse to be Department of Energy. Two interviews explores this “task environment” in At Risk in 1996 and downgraded its status with members of Saskatchewan the context of greater sage-grouse to Endangered in 2000. This followed Environment were also conducted. (Centrocercus urophasianus) and helps the lead of the federal Committee on the Overall, 25 out of 26 key informants us understand why we have not seen any Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada agreed that existing legal and policy
/ WLA | + O + O Q K tools required improvement to enable these laws should be applied. According thought to be the main causes of species to Cook, “federal interview subjects decline in Canada (2010). In light of weak support. Twenty-one out of 26 key provincial legislation, conservation groups informants stated they believed there were these provisions stating that ‘safety net’ are relying upon SARA and those never- major barriers to achieving sage-grouse provisions were never intended to be intended-to-be-implemented safety-net conservation and recovery goals. Some implemented and were instead put in place provisions to prevent the disappearance of to encourage complimentary provincial sage-grouse from Alberta’s grasslands. ' legislation” (sic) (p. 95). } ' # Prioritization of Provincial Economic departmentalization and fractured provinces that have failed to produce Agenda } ' provincial endangered species legislation. Within provincial government laws and policies have led to uncertainty Currently provincial species at risk are ministries there was found to be an in prioritizing conservation, overarching sloppily dealt with under the Alberta overarching emphasis given to ensuring emphasis upon economic agendas, and Wildlife Act. Originally developed in 1984 land and resources are managed to provide constrained application of the limited to govern consumptive wildlife activities, # tools that do exist (Cook, 2010). the Wildlife Act has been amended to Provincial and Federal Legislation include minimal provisions that give # R
Lorne Fitch discussing the habitat needs of species such as the greater sage-grouse during AWA’s 2010 guided hike into southeastern Alberta’s Sage Creek area. BG H ' E NF
Since its inception in 2002, the main some protection to endangered species. and wildlife resources, overall there is a piece of legislation that is supposed to However, besides producing a species clear primacy given to the use of Alberta’s protect species at risk in Canada is the recovery plan, the act requires no legal natural resources where economic “needs” Species at Risk Act (SARA). However protection for species or their habitat. All are valued above those of conservation. under SARA direct federal protection is other management and recovery actions Throughout the interview process only provided to species that occur on occur at the discretion of the Minister many informants mentioned the high federal lands. Although provisions exist of Sustainable Resource Development. priority attached to facilitating economic that require federal action on provincial Since the Alberta Greater Sage-Grouse development within the province and that, lands if a province is failing to protect Recovery Plan was produced in 2005, in some cases, this served as a barrier to species at risk, these “safety-net” populations have only continued to conservation. Certain interview subjects provisions have never been implemented. plummet. As Cook emphasizes, Alberta also indicated a “client” focus where part Based on statements made by federal wildlife legislation divides species and of their responsibility was to facilitate government representatives throughout habitat protection, despite the fact that industrial activities, as well as an overall the interview process, there is a great deal habitat loss and fragmentation due to culture of accommodation to the oil and of uncertainty surrounding if and when human activity and development are gas industry. As a result, land management
Q K | + O + O WLA D recommendations for species protection jurisdictional divisions (e.g. parks and degree contradictory. That is why it is such were often viewed as limiting industrial protected areas)” (p.27). It was concluded a tough job to do because you are walking < > @ the following quotations: within provincial government departments happy [industry] but also protecting the environment. So yeah, entrenched in public “Currently appears that the economy effect on land-use planning and sage- lands itself, we have policy directions that takes precedence over conservation; grouse conservation. The most consistent are not necessarily parallel.” ASRD - development trumps recovery...Cattle, oil Public Lands Representative (p.84) and water all seem to have a higher value to development versus conservation, than species at risk.” ASRD - Fish and especially within the ministry of “The biggest one is do we have a mandate Wildlife Representative (p. 77) Sustainable Resource Development to conserve and protect or do we have a \# %] mandate to develop and give access. Are “Alberta is open for business and that strongly with their divisional mandate we open for business or do we want to statement, which is commonly made and responsibilities than with the departmental protect and to what extent can we allow commonly made at the highest political mandate. protection before we impact the other or level implies that you will be able to do At the time Cook’s study took place, development before we impact protection. anything anywhere and you might have ASRD had four main departmental This is what I live with everyday, my staff certain conditions on that but you will be divisions: Forestry, Fish and Wildlife, and the Fish and Wildlife staff and the able to do it. And that basic understanding Public Lands and Corporate Services has sometimes severe implications (it should be noted that some of the with that. That is the SRD business plan.” for species at risk that may be heavily departmental divisions and responsibilities ASRD - Rangeland Representative dependent upon the continued existence of within ASRD have changed since the (p.84) an undisturbed landscape.” ASRD - Fish time of this study). Both ASRD-Fish and Wildlife Representative (p. 77) and Wildlife and ASRD-Public Lands Concluding Comments hold responsibilities that affect sage- _ ' grouse conservation and recovery. The immediately struck by the importance decision and one of the main reasons for Fish and Wildlife division is responsible of the insights gained by Cook into the that is to provide industry, our clients, for the management of Alberta’s wildlife institutional constraints through which with a high level of certainty as to allow resources but acts as an advisor to the seemingly simple management tasks are them to do the best forecasting and future land managers under ASRD-Public ' planning that they can do.” Department Lands, which has the most overarching surely a last-ditch effort, is required to of Energy Representative (p. 78) authority over the public lands in the draw attention to the plight of one of southeastern portion of the province. The Canada’s most endangered species. As “There tends to be a bit of a culture of responsibilities of the land managers are we move forward in our campaigns to accommodation to the oil and gas industry. further divided into those responsible for defend the wildlife, wild lands and wild So depending on which sectors we are industrial activities and those responsible waters across Alberta, we will continue dealing with, the agrologists side of things for the management of grazing activities. to confront this “task environment,” the downstairs, their top priority is to grazing Approval, renewal and management of ethical, organizational and policy forces lease holders and grazing and their close grazing dispositions is the responsibility and factors that affect our work on behalf second is the oil and gas industry. The fact of the rangeland management division, of endangered species. that the oil and gas industry on public lands while the lands disposition division is in We have known for over a decade actually pays money to the lease holders, charge of the approval and provision of that greater sage-grouse populations are they take it upon themselves sometimes to industrial dispositions. ASRD-Fish and plummeting. There exists a wealth of be advocates for the development because Wildlife informants referred to the fact information regarding their biological of that.” ASRD - Fish and Wildlife that the divisional segregation within requirements and maps delineating the Representative (p. 78) ASRD placed them in an oppositional role habitat critical to sage-grouse survival and to others in the department as they were recovery. We even know the threats these often viewed as hindering development. Jurisdiction Yet this multitude of information is clearly Within Alberta’s existing land-use “You are almost perceived as an enemy not enough. As a result, sage-grouse will management framework, land and resource of the people if you advocate that an area now get their second day in court. I leave authority are divided between several should not be able to have development you with the words of Candice Cook: departments and agencies, each holding on it. So that is the culture. That is the O ' various amounts of power and authority. cultural reality.” ASRD - Fish and some of my colleague’s research will be “Each government entity operates under Wildlife Representative (p.83) varying legislation and policy delegating beings to exist alongside these fantastical “Their [Fish and Wildlife’s] mandate is creatures or at least bring attention to components (e.g. water, air, wildlife), land to protect that species, my mandate is to the issue so that if in the end we fail, we use activities (e.g. industrial development, protect that species, but also to facilitate recognize our loss.”[emphasis added] wildlife management, recreation) and industrial development, which is to some
18 WLA | + O + O Q K STANDING UP FOR THE CASTLE
BY NIGEL DOUGLAS, Rick Collier is arrested Beaver Mines. BG H ' G F
“They put you in a box so you can’t get heard arrest in defence of our principles? O R Let your spirit stay unbroken, may you not “In jail, they take your belt, your wallet, a radical as a pastime,” he smiles. be deterred” your glasses, they put you in a solitary Collier describes himself as a “climber, Z & ' { cell,” says Collier when we meet in AWA’s hiker, backpacker, runner, skier...” He has $ > climbed all but one peak in the Castle. ick Collier doesn’t look like a that day. “No looking out, nothing to read, “I know all the valleys, most of the criminal. He’s a respectable- P > ridges,” he says. And over the years he Rlooking sort; early seventies, grey and points at the large, 9 foot by 3 ½ foot has developed a profound respect for this hair and glasses and a neatly trimmed board table. “The cell was about twice the spectacular landscape: “Some of the most moustache. But Rick and three other size of this table,” he says. “It was built to regenerative times I’ve had have been in Albertans–Mike Judd, Reynold Reimer be hosed out, with a plastic mat to sleep the Castle,” he says. and Jim Palmer–recently spent four hours P $ O So when he heard about the plans for in a Pincher Creek jail cell. They Spray Lake Sawmills to clearcut were arrested February 1 for log in the forests he loves, it standing up for their passionately- “What’sWhat legal is not always what is just. AndAn struck close to home. “They had held belief that the forests of what’s illegal il is not always what is unjust.” all their quasi-legal ducks in a southwest Alberta’s Castle region row,” he says. “This one seemed are worth more in their natural - Rick Collier such a travesty and so illogical. state than they are if they are There are other places they can felled and turned into so much garden your humanity” when you are thrown in get toothpicks from.” Which is when he mulch. prison. “You are being video-taped the decided that is was time to get involved. Thousands of people have written letters whole time,” he says. “I had taken off my “I said to myself: ‘This is one I’ve got to R wet jeans, so they took them away.” put it on the line for’.” protest the Castle logging. Hundreds of In fact Collier, an American by birth, There is no doubt that the logging people have attended rallies in Calgary, has been arrested twice before. “Once program in the Castle–120 hectares Edmonton and Beaver Mines. But how was in 1961 in the U.S. doing civil rights of clearcut logging in a critical water many of us would have had the strength work. The other was in 1967 in an anti- catchment area–is deeply unpopular or the courage of our convictions to face war protest down in the States.” But that amongst Albertans. Two opinion surveys
Q K | + O + O WLA @ ! " # $ %&$% BG H ' G F
carried out in southern Alberta in 2011 parties shall not occupy or use any other $ %$|& found that 79.5 and 85 percent of public lands in the province of Alberta with coffee and donuts for the protesters, respondents respectively were “strongly unless otherwise authorized to do so.” complimented the protesters on their opposed” or “somewhat opposed” to The RCMP made it clear that, if protesters respectful behaviour, then informed them commercial logging in the Castle. Around were still at the site on February 1, arrests that anybody who remained after 8:00 150 people attended a rally in Beaver would be made. a.m. would be arrested. “Those of us who Mines on January 22 to protest the But as Collier points out, “what’s legal would like to be arrested – where would logging; another 170 attended rallies in is not always what is just. And what’s you like us to stand?” asked one protester. Calgary and Edmonton on February 14. illegal is not always what is unjust.” When (see the video at www.pinchercreekvoice. On January 11, despite bitterly cold he talked to staff from Alberta’s Forestry com/2012/02/logging-protest-arrests. temperatures, local residents established division on site, he asked them: “Is there html#more ) Three protesters – Mike a protest camp in the planned logging a split between the head and the heart Judd, Reynold Reimer and Jim Palmer– location near the hamlet of Beaver Mines here? Are you a bit sad to see the forest remained on site and were duly arrested. (see timeline). Collier travelled down destroyed?” But apparently there was Collier took a different course. He left from Calgary a number of times to lend no internal debate going on there. “They the site as requested, walked along the his support, including attending the Z >'P O! right of way until he could see the huge January 22 rally. By the end of January, said, ‘no I like seeing this’.” Collier pauses feller buncher machines ready to begin it became clear that things were coming as he tries to remember the old Upton clearing trees, and then promptly went to a head. Protesters had been issued Sinclair quote - and sat down in front of one. “I sat right trespassing notices and a draconian court to understand something, when his salary down next to it,” he says. “They are order by the Alberta government to leave depends upon his not understanding awful machines and it was terrifying with the site. In fact the court order banned it! } the noise.” The police moved in quickly named protesters from all public land in says: “Maybe that’s where I decided (to to arrest him and drag him away. “I’m Alberta: nearly 400,000 km2 of land, or get arrested). I knew the talk was going pushing 71,” he says, the emotion still around 60 percent of the whole province! nowhere.” raw. “I had tears streaming down my The startling court order read: “The February 1 witnessed a uniquely cheeks. It was a combination of the stress
20 WLA | + O + O Q K of the whole morning and being all alone. Knowing this was the last stand, maybe Letter from Pincher Creek Jail for the whole area.” The same day, Alberta government staff “So here we sit today, four old men who have joined the thousands also issued the same shocking court order of voices in Alberta and around the World, the voices for wilderness, wildlife, water conservation, forest integrity, sustainability, healthy public land in Alberta. Mike Judd, award- recreation, and everything that is good and beautiful in the Southern winning author Sid Marty, and three Alberta Eastern Slopes.” other local residents, Gordon Petersen, Tim Grier and Diana Calder, all became “Why don’t you make the real change you promised, and that you have persona non grata in the province’s the authority to make, and stop this betrayal of the public trust?” forests, mountains and public spaces. Subsequently, the devastating court Letter to Premier Alison Redford from Pincher Creek Jail. By Mike Judd, orders were removed and the charges Rick Collier, Reynold Reimer and Jim Palmer against the arrested protesters were quietly dropped. This did not sit well with Collier. “I would rather have my afternoon in court and be able to say a few words if it would advance the cause,” he says ruefully. So was it all worth it for Collier? “Personally it was worth it for me to have Castle Protest. A Timeline made a stand and done what I could,” he January 11: despite the frigid temperatures, local residents set up a says. “Were there any alternatives? I don’t protest camp in the planned logging location. think so. We don’t have many options any January 19: Alberta Sustainable Resource Development (SRD) serves more.” Collier has had plenty of time to the protesters a Notice of Development under the Public Lands Act to ' vacate their camp immediately. the Castle, and he sees it as part of a much January 22: more than 150 people attend a rally near the proposed bigger issue. “I’m beginning to see that all logging site to protest the logging. this stuff is interconnected,” he says. “It’s January 23: SRD issues trespassing notices to the protesters who remain economics, it’s lifestyle, it’s consumerism. < We deal with all the little leaks in the January 26: RCMP and the SRD staff serve protesters with a Court Order tent, but we don’t want to question all the to vacate the area and dismantle the camp. In fact, the order bans named values of our current lifestyle. You have to protesters from all public land in Alberta, nearly 400,000 km2 of land! The put the pieces together, do what you can court order states: “The parties shall not occupy or use any other public locally, but not assume that’s enough.” lands in the province of Alberta unless otherwise authorized to do so.” Ultimately, did all of the letters, the January 30: a court order is served requiring the protesters to cease their telephone calls, the protests and the “trespass” on public lands. Protesters are given until February 1, when the arrests make any difference? Despite RCMP will begin making arrests. public opposition, Alberta Sustainable February 1: four protesters (Mike Judd, Rick Collier, Reynold Reimer Resource Development continues to and Jim Palmer) are arrested by RCMP for declining to leave the Castle allow Spray Lake Sawmills to clearcut the logging protest camp, despite a court order to do so. trees. The battle was lost, but what about % %$|& $ ! the war? Public opposition to clearcut protesters. The Court Order was served against Mike Judd; award-winning logging continues to grow in the Castle author Sid Marty; and three other local residents, Gordon Petersen, Tim and in many other communities that Grier and Diana Calder. are fed up with this woefully outdated Road clearing work at the site begins. forest management technique. SRD’s February 3: the Court Order is appealed at the Alberta Court of Queens } Bench in Calgary. February 23 ' ravenous pine beetles looks increasingly not to charge anti-logging protestors who were arrested on February shaky. Albertans clearly want a new 1. Protestors who were named in the related Court Order will not be paradigm for managing our forests and appealing that Order in court. Lawyers for the protestors, and the Crown’s we want a role to play in how decisions lawyer, reached an out-of-court understanding where no further action are being made on our behalf. Hopefully will be taken against those arrested, and where the Court Order will be you kept such thoughts about forest mis- allowed to expire. management at the front of your mind as you voted in the provincial election.
Q K | + O + O WLA 21 A VALENTINE’S DAY CALL FOR ACTION
BY SID MARTY
t a Valentine’s Day rally against # $ R bears traveling up from Montana, where the clear-cut logging in the Castle standing near, they declined to take us up AMountains of Alberta, I asked the on the offer. species. In Alberta, grizzlies are listed crowd of 150, assembled at the premier’s On January 24, four “obstructors” as as “threatened” but Alberta is where $ ' O R SRD styles us—Tim Grier, Dianne Calder, Montana bears come to die. We knew the law for me to stand on this publicly Gordon Petersen and yours truly faced off there had been no survey to identify bear owned land and speak to you today?” I with an idling bulldozer and feller buncher dens in the cut block, contrary to SRD’s explained how, as a reward for trying to in the forest reserve near Beaver Mines, own mandate. We knew that 80 percent of stop the destruction of the Castle Special for a moment of protest Zen. We stared the local population opposed the logging, Place, an executive director with Alberta’s back at the operators, thinking about the and we knew that a group of citizens oxymoronic Sustainable Resource events that had brought us to this point, were talking to the Premier that very day Development (SRD) ministry had issued after three weeks of picketing the site. in a last ditch effort to get a reprieve for a bunch of us, mostly old-timers, with The dude in the tracked fellerbuncher the Castle headwaters. In fact, a group an order to stay off all public land in this exercised the machine’s giant metal jaws, of local people, ourselves included, had province. In 1600 B.C., Emperor Wu of clacking them open and shut with a noise been working for years to get the area China said: “To protect your rivers, protect like a sprung bear trap. protected as a wild land park. They had your mountains” but that maxim is too { > the blessing of a minister of tourism for avant-garde for the government of Alberta. a special place by the Alberta Government the project. Eighty thousand people (and “If you try to protect Alberta’s mountains,” in l998 as part of a “network of protected ] R I continued, “they will arrest you and forbid areas” as “a major milestone in the to try and stop the clear cut logging of you from setting foot upon them. Well, I’m preservation of Alberta’s natural heritage the Castle, which provides a third of the standing on public land. So if you are a for future generations.” We knew the area water input to the Oldman River drainage law-abiding citizen, do your duty. Call the is designated “critical wildlife” habitat, and the cities of the plains. Surely the cops and have me arrested.” yet is part of a mortality sink for grizzly government would not allow SRD to clear
“Radicals” disguise themselves as rather ordinary-looking, middle-aged citizens during this January protest rally in the Castle. BG H ' KN
22 WLA | + O + O Q K cut this vital watershed, when it was so obviously at odds with the Progressive Conservative cabinet’s stated position on the Castle? But we also knew that SRD cared little about any of this. We knew that SRD was determined to log half of the 52 square kilometre license including old growth in these woods and turn whatever was not useable as lumber – 40 percent –into garden mulch and fence posts. You see, the more you damage an area, the less likely it is going to be set aside for a park, and the more likely SRD will maintain control of this piece of its turf. All the above citizens, of course, were not there at that moment. We were the point of the spear. I asked the folks at the rally “What would you have done? Would you have stepped aside, let all those folks down and let the destruction begin? Or would you have fought for what is right, for what is sustainable, for what is best for the people of Alberta, for the wildlife and the watershed?” The shouts of approval sounded a bit tentative, I must admit. Nobody wants to tangle with the legal system. SRD may have a legal right to clear-cut, but I would argue they no longer enjoy the social license that goes with it. It’s 2012, not 1912 and we cannot support a forestry department that will not give equal weight to all that the forest offers us, in terms of recreation, watershed protection and wildlife habitat. Do we really have to quantify water production in the forest, while water levels shrink in our major rivers? High quality raw water is beyond price, of course. But what about its value for industrial applications and agriculture? If the trees are worth one dollar each to the government in stumpage, (say a quarter- million dollars), I want to know what the forest is worth in terms of enhanced Winner: High School Category Untitled by Jessalyn Rohs and Rebecca Frederick (Henry Wise water retention, oxygen production, Wood High School) sequestration of carbon and generation of BG H ' E SK V tourism dollars. Is it worth millions to our if they need air to breathe and water to gets the message that talk-talk-talk while economy for these and other services it drink, are going to have to recognize you continue to drill, blast, and clear-cut provides, or more likely, is that measured that a handful of people, many of them will no longer fool the majority. Alberta in billions? You would think that the free grandmas and grandpas, cannot do at their is a spacious and lofty land that deserves market geniuses that run this province own expense and at their legal peril what the very best from us. It’s about time we battalions of politicians and bureaucrats matched its natural grandeur with some worth more to us alive than they are as are paid very well to do every day, which newer and grander ideas. garden mulch. These are questions we, as is protect the environment of Alberta activists, will have to answer with hard and ensure that projects on our public - Poet and author Sid Marty is a fourth ' % lands are truly sustainable. We have to generation Albertan. In 2008, he won the to do the studies for us. turn out at these types of protest actions Grant MacEwan Literary Arts Award for And there is another thing we have to do not by the dozens, but by the thousands, his career contributions to the literature in the future. The people of this province, @ of Alberta.
Q K | + O + O WLA 23 ASSOCIATION NEWS PACKED CROWD ATTENDS ALBERTA’S FIRST BY NIGEL DOUGLAS, ALL-PARTY CANDIDATES FORUM
Bragg Creek and the Castle Robyn Luff (Candidate for Calgary-East) ' New Democratic Party and he argued that the Luff, who described water as a “basic logging should be halted human right” talked about the importance until there is a process to of water to communities, particularly First allow people to be heard. > When governments have of climate change, though she was hopeful been in place for too long, that the excellent scientists we have in the Ashmore concluded, they province, along with the on-the-ground become complacent and knowledge of farmers and First Nations slow: we need a paradigm people, were a “fantastic resource” upon shift. which to build. Dealing with water shortages by building more dams is “not the best way Evan Berger (MLA for to go” she commented. Talking about the Livingstone-Macleod) ongoing logging in the Castle, she pointed Progressive Conservative out that NDP candidates had attended rallies Party opposing the logging, and commented Water Forum Candidates: from l-r, Larry Ashmore, Evan Berger, on the need to “ensure protected areas are Richard Jones, Robyn Luff and David Swann. Berger emphasized the actually protected.” BG H ' G need for good planning. He pointed to the province’s David Swann (MLA for Calgary- Land-use Framework Mountain View) Alberta Liberal Party t was standing room only at the process as the basis for protecting water “Good water stewardship begins at the Hillhurst Cottage School on March resources: “everything we do on the land source,” emphasized Swann. “The Eastern I28 as AWA hosted an all-party has an effect on water.” Water is obviously Slopes are the water towers and we need candidates forum to discuss “Water important for agriculture, he said; the to protect them.” Swann talked about the for Tomorrow” in Alberta. More than # failure of the provincial government to act on produces twenty percent of our food. behalf of Albertans to secure the long term provincial election candidates outline and Oil sands industries, he related, are also water supply, both surface and groundwater. debate their perspectives on major water getting better at using less water. Referring He stressed the need for good land-use issues affecting all Albertans. The lively to the Castle logging, he pointed out that planning and better independent science- discussion was chaired by CBC Radio’s logging in the area began in 1878, and that based monitoring; without adequate Donna McElligott. “nature deals with logging.” monitoring, we risk losing control of our “Our goal was to create more awareness “most vital resource.” The current informal about water-related issue in Alberta, market for water transfers he described as Richard Jones (Candidate for Calgary- so this was a very successful evening,” “unacceptable.” He emphasized that we Acadia) Wildrose Party said Christyann Olson, AWA Executive need more openness and transparency, and The Wildrose party is committed to Director. “It was very encouraging seeing we need the owner (i.e.: Albertans) to know repealing the Land Stewardship Act, so many people wanting to become what is going on. said Jones, though he recognized the engaged with their candidates in the need for regional planning, which he upcoming election.” Summaries of the All in all, the Water for Tomorrow Forum believes should be restored to municipal candidates’ positions are presented below. was a highly successful evening. The level governments. He emphasized the need of political engagement in Alberta seems to improve standards for storm water Larry Ashmore (Candidate for to have increased since a similar forum discharge, and the need to develop a better Livingstone-Macleod) EverGreen Party was held four years ago. Christyann Olson understanding of the relation between Ashmore talked about Alberta’s need thanked all of the candidates for their hard groundwater and surface water. Jones to transition away from the idea of work and willingness to stand up and to be ` <` % cheap abundant water. He stressed the our representatives. \ ' ] importance of using good science in water water allocation and the need for more management, and the need for testing and candidates to win a seat in the Legislature on on-stream and off-stream storage of water. monitoring. There was a need for more April 23rd. This will be David’s third term He described images of dead ducks in oil input from citizens, he pointed out: “people as the MLA for Calgary-Mountain View. sands tailings ponds as a “black eye for in the Castle were ignored.” People in Alberta” and a “failure of leadership.”
24 WLA | + O + O UPDATES Caribou, Wolves and Black Bears are all Victims of Alberta’s “Dirty Oil” Alberta’s reputation as the producer of “dirty oil” is increasingly having international repercussions, from the on-again-off-again Keystone pipeline application to the Northern Gateway pipeline to the European Union’s plans to have tar sands oil labelled as highly carbon-intensive. Not so long ago, saying “Alberta” to people around the world would have conjured up images of Banff National Park and pristine mountain scenery; now Alberta is more and more synonymous with decimated caribou populations and dead ducks on tailings ponds. To that growing list of oil sands casualties we can now add a steadily increasing number of dead black bears and wolves. In February 2012, the Edmonton Journal’s Darcy Henton revealed that in the previous year, 145 black bears had > ` { in the oil sands region after becoming conditioned to feeding on unsecured human garbage. Almost half of those bears – 68 in total – were shot in oil sands camps and facilities after being attracted to the camp by food, garbage and other attractants. Yet despite this systematic attraction of bears to their deaths, not a single company or individual was charged. This is of course hardly ground- breaking territory for Alberta: in 2009, after 12 bears were killed at the poorly- managed Conklin garbage dump, there ! Fish and Wildlife, Alberta Environment and the local municipality all wrung their ' other and then promptly did nothing. And business as usual continued at the camps. Oil companies continued with reckless abandon to fail to manage garbage and Winner: Junior High School Category “Beaver Weavers” by Lillian Whyburd and Gabriela Rodriguez. attractants, governments continued to do BG H ' E SK V nothing to stop them, and bears continued to be shot. Lots of bears. ‘senseless slaughter’ of wolves, February the grim prospect of wolves being shot Shooting is also the preferred method 23, 2012). for many years to come. Lots of wolves. of removing wolves from Little Smoky And now, with the publication of its Federal environment Minister Peter Kent caribou herd territory, mostly from long overdue Caribou Recovery Strategy commented that the proposed killing of helicopters, though strychnine poisoning (see Carolyn Campbell’s earlier article ), hundreds of wolves “bothers me a great is also commonplace, according to the federal government looks set to extend deal” (Canadian Press, August 26, 2011). trappers interviewed by the Edmonton the wolf-killing bonanza to many more of Similarly, Frank Oberle, Alberta’s Minister Journal ( the most vulnerable herds which opens up of Sustainable Resource Development
G | + O + O WLA 25 bears and wolves, nor the abandonment of woodland caribou to the rapacious oil sands machine. The ministers are not the only ones who are “bothered a great deal” or “deeply disappointed” or “dismayed.”
- Nigel Douglas
Budget 2012 Makes No Cents Within the 2012 federal budget, aptly coined the Economic Action Plan 2012: Jobs, Growth and Prosperity, Prime Minister Harper’s Conservatives strike again to reduce Canada’s already weak environmental legislation. The concrete changes contained within the Budget mainly affect the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA), a tool designed to identify, evaluate and offer recommendations on the environmental impacts associated with any project in which the federal government plays a role or has jurisdiction (See Professor Arlene Kwasniak’s article in the October 2011 issue of WLA for her evaluation of what past federal changes meant for environmental assessment in Canada). Importantly, CEAA is a mechanism that allows federal laws relevant to project > ' legal requirements aimed at protecting ' >' and national parks. Although this piece of legislation may already be considered too weak, CEAA is intended to consider the long term environmental consequences of development proposals and ensure that public participation is part of the environmental assessment process. Proposed changes to CEAA will limit joint panel environmental reviews to 24 months, National Energy Board hearings (such as that for the Northern Gateway pipeline project) to 18 months, and standard environmental assessments to Winner: Elementary School Category “Devastation” by Abby Kelly, Emily Dittner, and Sunny Li one year. These enforced limits could BG H ' E SK V result in incomplete, inadequate, or hastily performed environmental reviews. They (ASRD) informed the Alberta legislature commendable, it is presumably of little also will severely curtail the participation that he was “very disappointed” by the comfort to the wolves or bears involved. of Canadians in the environmental review continuing black bear slaughter (his The oil sands industry’s response to process. Just as worrying, the federal predecessor as ASRD Minister, Ted the “dirty oil” moniker has been the well- government will recognize provincial Morton was also “dismayed” to hear funded “ethical oil” campaign. But clearly environmental assessments as equivalent about the 2009 Conklin bear deaths). there is nothing remotely ethical about to federal assessments, despite the fact Though these prickling consciences are the unnecessary killing of hundreds of that Alberta provincial assessments
/ WLA | + O + O G apply a “directly affected” standard that balancing environmental and economic for the Stoney Indian band’s appeal to excludes public interest groups like AWA, realities.” Yes, you can say that again. the Alberta Court of Appeal. The Court and may be less rigorous. This “one In a government news release Finance seemed to agree wholeheartedly with project one review” commitment will Minister Jim Flaherty stated: “In this the band. “In our view, the board did drastically reduce the number of major budget, our Government is looking ahead @ } ' projects subject to a federal environmental not only over the next few years but transparent or intelligible way,” the court assessment. Not surprisingly, industry also over the next generation.” Through found. “Its decision not to qualify the special interest groups have applauded the these changes to the Fisheries Act and reserve as an urban centre falls outside government’s intentions. environmental assessment, shutting of the range of acceptable and rational < down the National Round Table on the outcomes that are defensible in respect of may have materialized in amendments to Environment and the Economy, and the facts and law.” the federal Fisheries Act that are part of the heightened monitoring by the Canada The successful appeal is one more government’s 431 page omnibus budget Revenue Agency of what groups like setback in a long list of glitches in the bill. In the name of “everyday Canadians” AWA say, I think this government has Sullivan application saga, including: who face “obtrusive interference” from made it very clear what kind of Canada The ERCB hearing into the the federal Department of Fisheries they envision for future generations. application began November 12, 2008 and Oceans the budget bill eviscerates and was expected to take two weeks. The the law’s habitat protection provisions. - Madeline Wilson > Section 35 (1) of the Fisheries Act January 30, 2009. currently reads: “No person shall carry One More Nail in the Coffin for February 2009, the entire hearing on any work or undertaking that results Kananaskis Sour Gas Development process was suspended by ERCB, due to in the harmful alteration, disruption or Construction of Suncor Energy’s ill- a revealed budding personal relationship P < fated Sullivan sour gas development in between an ERCB employee and a Petro change to this section reads: “No person Kananaskis Country seems unlikely to Canada employee, both involved in shall carry on any work, undertaking or begin any time soon, even though it is the hearing. ERCB later ruled that the activity that results in serious nearly two years since the company’s integrity of the hearing process had not that are part of a commercial, recreational predecessor Petro Canada received been compromised. or Aboriginal ' approval from the Energy Resource November 2009, the Sullivan P \ ] Conservation Board (ERCB). The latest application process was suspended again, < > setback to the development is a successful along with all other sour gas applications legal appeal by the Stoney Indian band. in the province. This decision followed whose eyes and by what measures? And, Back in June 2010, despite widespread an unexpected Alberta Court of Appeal public opposition, ERCB granted Suncor ruling which ruled that ERCB had erred be caught and eaten it’s now. Pity the poor permission to drill 11 sour gas wells and in denying standing to three residents of R build 37 km of pipeline across a swathe the Rocky Rapids area 140 kilometres R < R of relatively pristine Kananaskis Country southwest of Edmonton when they tried to our consideration. land. The pipeline would cross the Eden oppose two proposed sour gas wells close < \ Valley Reserve, and the implications for to their properties. This suspension was Z ] reserve residents were startling. One of also later lifted. require healthy habitats would be O P So once again, given the current legal laughable if it wasn’t so serious to the approval read “The Board requires Petro- situation and low gas prices, it remains future of Canadian aquatic species. Fish, Canada to assess each residence of the to be seen whether Suncor will have and other aquatic species, cannot survive if Eden Valley Reserve for its suitability the appetite to proceed with the deeply their habitat is not protected and, because for sheltering in place and to identify unpopular Sullivan application. At the the federal government has constitutional and upgrade at least one room in each original 2008-09 ERCB hearings, AWA ' residence to make it suitable for sheltering actively opposed the development on no other level of government can legally in place.” Imagine how you would feel if a number of grounds, including threats < that condition were applied to your house to grizzly bears and cutthroat trout. We expressed in a letter to Prime Minister and your neighbourhood! would obviously not be sorry to see the Stephen Harper signed by 625 prominent In its original approval, ERCB decided whole inappropriate project withdrawn in Canadian scientists, requesting him not to not to classify the Eden Valley as an its entirety. gut the Fisheries Act. According to federal “urban centre.” Setback requirements for ` | # ' O sour gas developments are considerably - Nigel Douglas are outdated and unfocused in terms of as urban centres, and this was the basis
G | + O + O WLA D No Public Involvement in Forestry directly east of this important wilderness Management Plans (10 year plans created Deal; Health of North Saskatchewan region. This area contains the headwaters under the longer term FMAs). AWA was and Red Deer River Headwaters at of important rivers that supply fresh water assured that staff involved in the FMA to Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba, renewal would review our submission. Stake irreplaceable habitat for threatened grizzly Whether or not this review results in The Forest Management Agreement bear and bull trout populations along with any concrete changes, commitments (FMA) held by West Fraser-owned Sundre many other wildlife and plant species, or recognition will remain to be seen, Forest Products Inc. (SFP), comprising > although based on experience, we will not a large swathe of public land between 10,000 years, and an area with vast low- hold our breath. Sundre and Nordegg, Alberta, east of Banff impact recreational opportunities. On the heels of widespread public and Jasper National Parks will expire in AWA supports responsible ecosystem- opposition to forest harvest plans in the August 2012. Although this is public land, based forest management practices that Castle and in West Bragg Creek, AWA is meant to be managed by the provincial do not prioritize sustained timber yields calling for the development of a meaningful government in the best interest of all at the expense of healthy watersheds, and transparent public consultation Albertans, a behind-closed-doors renewal wildlife habitat or the immeasurable process to be incorporated into forest process between Alberta Sustainable wilderness values of forest ecosystems. management frameworks province wide. Resource Development (SRD) staff and Although there is no requirement to It would seem that after broadly attended the forestry corporation is well underway. conduct a formal public consultation protests, public forums, and thousands Due to the lack of public consultation process surrounding FMA renewals, AWA of calls and letters to Premier Redford’s being conducted as part of this renewal, submitted a document in early March to Albertans may miss this one-in-twenty- % ' the southern Eastern Slopes, the public year opportunity to provide input into the the principles of ecosystem-based forest has made it clear there is a strong need to management of valuable forests in the management we hope to see incorporated develop new and innovative policies and Eastern Slopes of the Rocky Mountains, into all future forest management plans frameworks governing provincial land within which lie the headwaters of both in the province, beginning with the the North Saskatchewan and Red Deer renewed SFP FMA. In a recent response Albertans. Rivers. to our submission, SRD Minister Oberle The western edge of the SFP FMA falls reiterated that public consultation was not - Nigel Douglas within the Bighorn Wildland, and the rest mandatory for FMA renewals, but that of the FMA area occupies the strip of land public consultation is required for Forest
Valentine’s Day Save our Forests Rally in Calgary BG H ' KN
28 WLA | + O + O G Alberta’s Forests Feel the Love on Discover Ottawa’s Nature on to show the government there was a need, a Valentine’s Day! Jasper’s Glacier Walk public demand, for its ambitions. Brewster’s This Valentine’s Day, more than Icon or travesty - those labels describe draft EA attempted just this. 170 Albertans braved chilly winter well what we’ve heard about Brewster Here’s where the EA suggests that Parks temperatures to attend Save our Forests Travel Canada’s Glacier Discovery Walk. Canada doesn’t seem very concerned rallies in Calgary and Edmonton. Whatever side of this issue you are on Participants wrote their own valentines I suggest we still need to be concerned information it’s asked to consider. Brewster to Premier Redford, letting her know how about what the project says about Ottawa’s used a marketing survey to demonstrate the much they love their forests, and asking environmental assessment philosophy. project’s future public popularity. The draft her to listen to Albertans. Our forests are When the Glacier Walk is completed EA called this assessing “the strength of the worth so much more than vertical lumber, paying customers are promised a stunning GDW concept as an attraction.” yet the government persists in managing vista of the Sunwapta canyon. A careful The survey data seem impressive. look at the environmental assessment (EA) A whopping 90 percent of respondents Supporters waved placards calling for prepared by Brewster and accepted by Parks said they were likely to visit Brewster’s protection of the Castle Wildland, while Canada offers a far less pleasant vista. It attraction. Albertans appeared very the Raging Grannies sang their own suggests public participation and good enthusiastic. Eighty-eight percent of survey inimitable protest songs and author Sid social science mattered little in assessing the respondents from Alberta promised to visit Marty gave an impassioned talk about project’s merits. { > Z the draconian measures being used by the It tells us much about how closed and of those Albertans might go to the parks Alberta government to keep him and other blinkered federal environmental policy- Castle protesters quiet. Speakers from making has become. When federal politicians Wow. It’s no wonder the EA positively AWA and CPAWS joined representatives rail against environmental groups who take glowed when it assessed just how strong the from Stop the Castle Logging, Wild their protests outside Canada government attraction of the Discovery Walk would be. Canada Conservation Alliance and the members would be well advised to consider Build it, the world will come. Bragg Creek Environmental Coalition to this: the closed nature of federal decision- This glowing conclusion was built on call for changes to the clearcut logging > sand. A closer look at the data shows the practices so prevalent in Alberta’s forests. Did the Glacier Walk EA value public sampling was very unrepresentative. Who Nobody called for an end to logging, participation in national parks decision- < > period. Instead they spoke about how our making? Public participation, described only contacted people who had at one time forests need management that respects ~ & > O or another supplied their email addresses to all of their non-timber values, including Canadians’ involvement in key decisions Brewster. production of clean water and wildlife concerning their park,” is key to realizing The notion the public wants this “icon” habitat. the Parks Canada goal of “fostering open built is devastated by the survey’s single- Does the Alberta government love our management and innovation.” The federal digit response rate. It was a dismal six forests too? Only time will tell. But there government claimed the Brewster EA was percent. Nearly 8,000 people on Brewster is no better time than an election campaign true to this mandate. Environment Minister email lists were surveyed. Only 474 replied. Peter Kent described the consultation So, 300 or so Albertans (using the 75 to change or to listening to what Albertans process as “robust and inclusive” while percent result above) constitutes “a very are trying to tell them. Michael Hannan, Brewster’s President, strong indicator of the attraction concept.” I told the national press his company held have never seen a political opinion poll that “numerousnume open houses” about its dream. would make such a rash conclusion based RoRobust,b inclusive, and numerous are odd on such a sample and such a response rate. wwordsords to use to describe this EA. Four open Apparently, however, it was good enough to hhousesouses were held over four consecutive days show Parks Canada there is a public need for iinn JasJasper,p Banff, Calgary, and Edmonton in this venture. # ~ < { > [# eve of the deadline for commenting on the if you value public participation and good ddraftraft EA.E That’s it. Not even a token effort social science. Let’s hope the foundations wwasas mmade to let Canadians outside Alberta for the actual walkway will be much stronger kknownow about this potential development than the case made for the project’s need in iinn “their“th park.” This EA never valued what Minister Kent called a “thorough and sstrengtheningtrengt Canadians’ involvement in (…) very robust environmental assessment.” ddecision-making.ecisio If it had then perhaps the Let’s also hope future EAs will treat those GlGlacieracie Walk controversy might not have values with the respect they deserve. gone viralv and international on the internet. More than 182,000 people from around the - Ian Urquhart woworldrld have signed a “Save Jasper National R Park” online petition. independent newspaper the Fitzhugh on This failure to consult meaningfully March 29, 2012. doesn’t mean Brewster’s didn’t feel it had
G | + O + O WLA @ LETTERS
Mr. Alan Latourelle CEO, Parks Canada Agency Mr. Greg Fenton Superintendent, Jasper National Park
February 15, 2012
Dear Mr. Latourelle and Mr. Fenton,
The Bow Valley Naturalists are writing any opposition as emanating from a EA in full knowledge of this fundamental to express our extreme disappointment small group of local residents in Jasper. ' in the terrible decision announced on Yet in more than 4 decades we have not only to the site itself but to whatever February 9th by Minister Kent to approve been active, we rarely have witnessed aspirations the agency may have – and at the Brewster Travel/Viad Corp so-called such a widespread, even angry, reaction one time it did have such aspirations – to Glacier Discovery Walk in Jasper National # be a credible, science-based organization, Park. A letter was sent by us to the Minister we heard came from people who are not committed to long term studies as a vital shortly after his announcement. We are members of any conservation organization. component in ongoing efforts to better an organization with approximately 140 They just care about national parks. understand the ecosystems in your care. members based in the upper Bow Valley of Alberta, primarily Banff and Canmore. Then there was a very short-lived The Bow Valley Naturalists have no We have been actively involved in national error – quickly corrected - in an online doubt how obvious it must be that to park issues since our formation in 1967. petition that prompted a hastily prepared, characterize our reaction to the decision patronizing public relations campaign as “extreme disappointment” is a huge Our members were appalled that this by Parks Canada that implied anyone understatement. We desperately wish it proposal ever was permitted to see the objecting to the proposal was doing so was possible also to express surprise but light of day; yet as time went on, things based on misleading information. We unfortunately, it seems all too consistent went from bad to worse. And the role of asked for your acknowledgement of what with current Agency priorities. We see no senior managers with Parks Canada in you know to be true which is that the need to reiterate the concerns about the smoothing the way for Brewster/Viad was vast majority of responses you received project we – and many others – brought to shameful. from people who spent time and effort your attention earlier; clearly a corporate preparing and presenting their thoughts { Here is some of what we observed on the were not based on any misinformation ' part of your Agency: whatsoever. Indeed, some of the responses carefully calculated, is your willingness to you received were from people who are deliberately alienate so many Canadians Throughout, there was little attempt to far more familiar with the site than are the whose passion for enduring national park disguise the fact that the proposal had hired-gun consultants who delivered for values could make them Parks Canada’s met with a favourable response from their clients an environmental assessment strongest allies. Parks Canada as it proceeds in its chosen (EA) to help the project gain approval. direction. This was despite the fact you But no such acknowledgement was This decision will result in impairment to are well aware there is no public demand forthcoming. Jasper National Park and, by extension, to have this type of gimmickry imposed symbolically, the entire national system. on landscapes you have been given the Parks Canada is very conscious of the And Parks Canada has allowed itself to be privilege to manage free of impairment. value of long term ecological studies and badly tainted in the process. Clearly, you grossly underestimated the the risks inherent in basing decisions on scale of negative reaction from people short term snapshots such as those taken Yours in sadness, who cherish their national parks. In the last summer as part of the pretense of early stage of the public review this studying mountain goat populations in the Mike McIvor, President resulted in your attempts to marginalize area. Your positive determination of the Bow Valley Naturalists
30 WLA | + O + O B F EVENTS Music For the Wild Saturday, May 12, 2012 Summer Hikes Programme The Wardens AWA is proud to announce our hikes programme for the Summer of 2012! Three Parks Canada park wardens sharing their stories through song. Backcountry In addition to the below events we have a number of other great camping horse patrols, mountain rescues and M > on our webpage, where we always have the most complete and up-to-date for these singing wardens whose “tales of list posted. Or you can subscribe to our email list serve where we post adventure and misadventure” in the rocky announcements for all hikes and other events. mountain national parks have been set to music and verse. The evening’s songs are Exact details regarding start times and locations are sent to registrants about accompanied by visuals and stories that a week before the event date. give the audience an unforgettable way to experience what life is actually like for a Pre-registration is required for all hikes: 1 (866) 313-0713 park warden. Online: www.AlbertaWilderness.ca/events Opening Act: Prairie’s Edge June 1-3: Orchids in the Lakeland with Aaron Davies Doors open at 7:00 p.m. 2 day / 3 night easy-to-moderate camping trip ($50 members / $60 non- Music starts at 7:30 p.m. members) Tickets: $15.00 June 9: Spring in the Whaleback with Bob Blaxley Pre-registration is required: | Z Z > \ Z ] (403) 283-2025 Online: www.AlbertaWilderness.ca/events June 14: Porcupine Hills with Vivian Pharis Easy-to-moderate hike ($20 members / $25 non-members)
July 6: Dry Island Bus Tour Edmonton Solstice Swing Easy bus tour ($55 members / $65 non-members) Friday June 22, 2012 August 20-23: Backpacking in the Castle with Reg Ernst AWA invites all Edmonton members, ¡ > > \ Z prospective members, friends and members) supporters join us at the Muttart Conservatory to mark the summer solstice. There will be entertainment, September 22: Fall in the Whaleback with Bob Blaxley education, good friends, great food and | Z Z > \ Z ] more! August 3: Sage Creek with Lorne Fitch Location: Easy-to-moderate hike ($20 members / $25 non-members) Muttart Conservatory, Edmonton
Time: 6:00 p.m. Tickets: $80.00
Pre-registration is required: 1 (866) 313-0713 Online: www.AlbertaWilderness.ca/events
Crocus, Jasper National Park BG H ' F
| + O + O WLA 31 SAGE-GROUSE HAVE BEEN ENDANGERED FOR MANY YEARS BUT GOVERNMENTS HAVE DONE VERY LITTLE TO ELIMINATE HUMAN DISTURBANCES IN CRITICAL SAGE-GROUSE HABITAT.
STILL ONLY 13 MALES LEFT?
WWW.ALBERTAWILDERNESS.CA
Return Undeliverable Canadian Addresses to:
Alberta Wilderness Association Box 6398, Station D Calgary, Alberta T2P 2E1 [email protected]
Canadian Publications Mail Product Sales Agreement No. 40065626 ISSN 485535