Get the inside scoop on The Narwhal’s environment and climate reporting by signing up for our free newsletter.
Just before the official start of the provincial election in Saskatchewan, the agency responsible for overseeing the largest infrastructure project in the province’s history released a new report into its economic benefits.
Then the government shut down for the election and questions swirled.
The infrastructure project, the Lake Diefenbaker irrigation expansion, is estimated to cost $4 billion if all phases are fully built. The expansion, overseen by the provincial Water Security Agency, would double the irrigable land in the province — first refurbishing unused infrastructure and eventually building new canals to pull more water east into areas that have always relied on the whims of the weather for water.
The government says the benefits will be outsized, bringing new crops to vast areas of the province and increasing investments in food processing.
The report by consulting firm KPMG examined the financial returns of the first phase of the project, estimating it will increase provincial gross domestic product by $5.8 billion over the next 50 years. That first phase is expected to cost $1.15 billion.
The report calls it a “generational opportunity for Saskatchewan” that will contribute to the province’s reputation as a “trusted source of food and ingredients” and benefit everything from employment to investment to “prairie resilience” and said it will “enable sustainability.”
But critics question the economic analysis, and the lack of discussion on climate and environmental impacts including potential impacts on drinking water and a lack of Indigenous consultation.
Peter Leavitt, a professor of biology and Canada Research Chair in environmental change and society at the University of Regina, told The Narwhal economic analyses from the province tend to be “self-serving,” designed to say what the government wants. He said the latest irrigation report is no different.
“And the environmental stuff and the Indigenous perspectives,” he said, “I think they are going to be ignored unless they go to court.”
Saskatchewan is home to more than 40 per cent of Canada’s cultivated farmland, producing millions of tonnes of canola, barley, wheat, oats, lentils and more. Only a fraction relies on irrigation — essentially watering the crops instead of relying on rain.
The Lake Diefenbaker irrigation expansion will build on the province’s existing irrigation capabilities. The first phase of the project will take old canals and pump stations that were built decades ago but never used, and refurbish them to bring water farther north and west from the existing irrigation area flowing from Lake Diefenbaker — the largest body of water in southern Saskatchewan, it was created for irrigation, hydroelectricity and drinking water in 1967.
Eventually, new canals will be built to bring water east, connecting to Buffalo Pound Lake — 100 kilometres southeast of Lake Diefenbaker — which provides drinking water to Moose Jaw and Regina.
The project has been on the books since 2020, but was reaffirmed as a commitment by the Scott Moe government this summer, with millions earmarked in the latest budget for phase one work.
The first phase is also highlighted in the Saskatchewan Party platform, which was recently released ahead of the Saskatchewan election on Oct. 28.
Construction is supposed to start next year, with $30 million already spent on studies and reports.
When the latest economic study was released last month, economists were quick to criticize it.
Peter Phillips, a retired economics professor for the University of Saskatchewan’s Johnson Shoyama Graduate School of Public Policy, told CBC News the report wouldn’t have made it past his office when he worked in government as an economic advisor, and that the lack of information in the report raised red flags.
Many of the economic benefits rely on an increase in food manufacturing and a switch to more valuable crops that Phillips wasn’t convinced would materialize.
Leavitt, who is quick to point out his expertise is not economics, called the report “smoke and mirrors” and said the impacts likely won’t be as significant as the government advertises. He also pointed to the fact it ignores the costs of environmental impacts such as water pollution from increased runoff.
“It’s frequently done,” he said, referring to the omission. “But whether you should is a different question. Generally speaking, the costs of environmental remediation increase near-exponentially as you wait for the problem to get worse.”
The report does mention “permitting and environmental considerations and approvals” as a risk, but only insofar as permits and approvals could delay the project.
Fred Bradshaw, the minister responsible for the Water Security Agency prior to the election call, told a legislative committee the project would build resilience against climate change by enabling more drought mitigation, but the lack of information regarding environmental impacts and an examination of the effects of climate change is a common critique of the proposal.
Cheryl Stadnichuk, a Regina city councillor, wants to see climate modelling that looks at the impacts on water supply flowing from the Rocky Mountains in Alberta and across the plains into Lake Diefenbaker.
She worries about how often drought could affect supply, as well as about the quality of the water that will come out of her city’s taps as Buffalo Pound Lake is connected to the broader system.
“Buffalo Pound Lake has to deal with a lot of algae blooms in the summer months,” Stadnichuk said. “We get a lot of complaints as city councillors from residents about, ‘Why is there this smell, what’s going on?’”
It’s not just the smell that’s a concern. Nutrients from fertilizer runoff brought by increased irrigation and canals connecting water bodies can cause those algae blooms, affecting water quality and health and impacting fish and ecosystems.
“Diefenbaker, which is our drinking water reservoir for half of the population in Saskatchewan, is already exhibiting significant water quality degradation,” Leavitt said.
“It’s starting to have blooms of cyanobacteria, which it never did, and it’s starting to lose oxygen at a rate that’s much higher than most other lakes, and that’ll affect the trophy fishery that they’ve got in the lake as well.”
Cyanobacteria can cause rashes, diarrhea, fever-like symptoms and respiratory issues, but it can be filtered with appropriate water treatments.
Leavitt said the project will cross creeks that feed into the South Saskatchewan River system that ends in the largest inland river delta in North America and also supplies drinking water to Saskatoon.
“So those are sort of express ways to get nutrients and pollutants, including agrochemicals, into the water in the South Saskatchewan River,” he said.
The federal Impact Assessment Agency determined there was not enough information on the first elements of the project to determine if they required a federal assessment — it was initially broken up into three phases, but now the first phase combines elements of the first two proposed phases.
It did, however, say the third phase, during which new canals will bring water to the east, met the criteria for a federal review.
David Cooper, the vice-president of agriculture services and economic development at the Water Security Agency, told a legislative committee in April the federal assessment was a factor in deciding to proceed with the rehabilitation portion of the project first.
The province has not conducted its own environmental assessment of the project or its phases.
Leavitt wrote to the federal Impact Assessment Agency in 2021 to request an assessment, but said he’s not necessarily opposed to the project moving forward. He told The Narwhal the decision to break up the project into stages is political.
“This is the way Saskatchewan works,” he said. “It takes large projects and it splinters them to pretend that each individual project is completely in isolation and that that won’t have any cumulative effects down the road. Therefore, you don’t need impacts assessment. It’s complete bollocks.”
A document uploaded to the Water Security Agency’s Lake Diefenbaker irrigation project website backs up Leavitt’s assertion. Dated April 5, 2021, the briefing note says referring to the various components of the project as phases could trigger either a federal or provincial review of the entire project.
“Overcoming this view as one project indivisible will be a challenge to overcome in the approvals process and renaming is part of the process to differentiate the projects as separate and distinct as each segment stands on its own merits,” it reads.
First Nations in Saskatchewan have expressed concern about the impacts of the project, as well as a lack of consultation.
Chief Bobby Cameron of the Federation of Sovereign Indigenous Nations told CBC News in March he was “deeply troubled” by the lack of consultation as the government moved forward on the first phase of the project.
The federation, which represents 74 First Nations in Saskatchewan, also requested a federal impact assessment and cited cumulative effects of development on rivers and lakes as well as the effects of the full irrigation expansion.
“There are concerns that water management decisions prioritize industrial and agricultural allocations over ecosystems and the impact it will have on First Nations and their ability to exercise their Inherent and Treaty Rights and traditional activities,” reads the letter from 2021.
The federation did not respond to an interview request sent to its communications department.
Leavitt, who has done work for the federation, said he doesn’t think impacts on Indigenous Rights will be addressed unless the province is taken to court to consider cumulative impacts similar to the Blueberry River First Nation decision, which forced the B.C. government’s hand.
It’s clear the Saskatchewan Party supports the irrigation expansion, moving the project forward in government and supporting it outright in its platform. The government, under Moe, is eager to get the first phase underway.
The provincial NDP said during a campaign announcement it’s open to the project, but lacks information to assess the costs and benefits.
Neither party responded to multiple requests for an interview or comments.
Stadnichuk said she’s had trouble getting information from both the government and the Water Security Agency, which she said fits a larger pattern.
“They’ve done a number of mega projects that are a billion plus [dollars], without providing too much information ahead of time,” she said, citing a carbon capture project and a transportation hub in Regina.
“They want to take on big projects because it’s going to have this wonderful economic benefit somehow, and we don’t always see the results. So it’s kind of hard to trust them this time around.”
Get the inside scoop on The Narwhal’s environment and climate reporting by signing up for our free newsletter. For decades, forestry companies in B.C. have used...
Continue reading
Photojournalism that centres humanity is in our DNA. We spent more than $50,000 doing it...
In this week’s newsletter, we chat with B.C. biodiversity reporter Ainslie Cruickshank about British Columbia’s...
How many narwhals does it take to make a pun about journalism? We asked cartoonist...
