The Coal Valley mine, nestled in the foothills of Alberta’s Rocky Mountains, is a sprawling 200 square kilometres and has been in operation since 1978. Three hours west of Edmonton, it stretches alongside Highway 40, forming a long, narrow gash that includes large open mine pits as well as areas in the process of being reclaimed. It’s part industrial, part moonscape, part nature. 

It has been closed over the years as markets dip — most recently for three months in 2025 — and it has moved tremendous amounts of earth and coal. Currently only one of its pits is active.

On paper, the mine looks bad. There have been 16 incidents in the past three years, almost all of which were spills into the creeks and rivers in and around the site. That makes it the worst existing mine in Alberta in terms of the number of infractions. But the company behind the mine says numbers don’t tell the whole story.

The mine operates under the name Prairie Mines and Royalty ULC, and is ultimately owned by Denver-based Westmoreland Mining, one of three companies that still operate commercial coal mines in Alberta. It was the only one to respond to questions emailed from The Narwhal for an article about infractions at coal mines. 

“We appreciate your questions and the approach you’re taking with this story,” Jon Heroux, Westmoreland’s director of external affairs, wrote. “I think we can do one better than simply giving you an interview over the phone or by email.”

This is not typical of Alberta’s coal mining companies, many of which seldom, if ever, respond to journalists’ requests.

A little more than a week later, company representatives spent a day driving two journalists from The Narwhal around the site.

Alberta government wants to bring industry back from the brink

Coal was once big business in Alberta. Rich seams were found buried in the mountains and foothills, and the Prairies offered easy access to lower-quality coal that powered local electricity plants for decades. As recently as 2018, coal-fired power was the main source of electricity in Alberta.

The Crowsnest Pass in the southwest boomed (and busted) alongside the black rock at the heart of its economy, bringing wealth but also disparity, which led to strikes and even communist agitation from disgruntled workers.

But the markets changed — changes in demand, swings in prices — and so did government regulations. As the industry waned in the south of the province, the 1970s government of former Progressive Conservative premier Peter Lougheed introduced restrictions aimed at preserving beloved landscapes — and the all-important water that trickles and surges down those rocky slopes.

Three decades later in 2024, the phase-out of coal-fired electricity — a significant source of air pollution and emissions — in Alberta spelled the end of strip mines near electrical power plants, which are now mostly powered by natural gas. But that phase-out still allows for some mining. Alberta produces both thermal coal, which is exported to places that still burn it for electricity or for industrial uses, and metallurgical coal, which is used in steel-making.

Today, just three large commercial coal mines are up and running (four if you count Dodd’s, a family operation that mostly serves individuals and farms). Coal Valley is one of two that produces thermal coal mostly used in factories abroad while the third is a metallurgical mine. 

But it’s not the end of the story of coal in Alberta, at least not yet. 

The current provincial government has opened the door to new mines in areas set aside by the Lougheed conservatives in 1976, and a new coal policy — a guide to where and when mining can take place — is expected this year. This follows five years of acrimonious debate and public backlash against opening the Rocky Mountains to new mines.

According to data from the Alberta Energy Regulator, the three existing mines have struggled to keep coal waste and sediment out of the province’s waterways, a key concern for Albertans wondering what will happen to the headwaters for the Canadian Prairies if they’re contaminated.

There have been 42 incidents in the past three years, almost all of which involve water.

Further south of the existing mines clustered in west-central Alberta, new metallurgical coal mines have been pitched for the traditional mining region near Crownest Pass. The water that flows from the rocky slopes there tumbles across an astonishing expanse of prairie clean through to Manitoba, providing habitat and hydration to ecosystems, helping to irrigate crops and slake the thirst of livestock, wildlife and humans alike.

Cavernous pits and tree-lined lakes

Inside the main office at Coal Valley, the smell of coal — like fresh asphalt — permeates the two-storey space, which sits next to workshops designed to handle repairs on towering mine dump trucks. The walls are adorned with colouring sheets showing mine workers, carefully filled in by local young students, some of whom have parents at the mine.

Inside a conference room a map of the mine is displayed under a glass top on the table. Here, Scott Sturm, Westmoreland’s chief operating officer, and Steve Love, the mine’s general manager, talk about operations and reclamation, water and regulations while pointing to areas on the map. Charles Reid, senior legal and government affairs counsel, asks that the conversations not be recorded.

They talk about how the coal on site doesn’t have high levels of selenium, a compound that’s harmful to fish and human health in high quantities and a key concern in the ongoing debate about the future of coal mining in Alberta. The lack of selenium is a simple bit of geochemical luck rather than the product of engineering or human ingenuity, but it helps the company set itself apart when discussing spills. Its claims are backed up by water sampling conducted for the company by an independent contractor. 

Before setting out for a tour of the mine, they talk about the incidents listed by the regulator, including areas where spills have occurred. 

One recent incident dumped sediment in a creek, the result of erosion from a roadway and a collapsed culvert. At the site of the spill, the system designed to contain the sediment is still in place: a floating yellow barrier. Today, it’s closer to shore and smaller in size compared to three months earlier — Sturm pulls out his phone to share a photo from the time of the spill.

Sturm, a white-goateed man who looks somehow built for coal mining, says another incident in April was the result of ice blocking outflow from the mine’s long stretch of ponds. Known as Coal Creek, the long, narrow series of ponds are where debris and contaminants settle as the water slowly moves through them, ultimately discharging into a small waterway. The ice, combined with snowmelt and heavy rain, overwhelmed Coal Creek, and led to the spill.

Those spills involved sediment. And even without some of the chemical pollution concerns experienced by other mines, it can still have an impact. Sediment-laden riverbeds can smother habitat and impact fish and insect reproduction, and there is always the risk of contamination from pollutants including arsenic and heavy metals.

The company is also under investigation by the Alberta Energy Regulator for an incident related to a spill from the same area in 2025, but details have not been released.

In a follow-up email after the tour, Heroux says Westmoreland is working on “permanent engineering improvements” to the facility and says the company measures water quality after a spill. Heroux says conditions remained within regulatory limits following the spill in April and noted the company monitors surface water at 47 locations throughout the mine, as well as groundwater, streamflow and wetland conditions around the site.

“​​We also sample 20 additional locations upstream and downstream of the mine and exceed a number of the minimum monitoring requirements contained in its approvals,” Heroux wrote.

The tour pauses at the cavernous Pit 26, the only area of the mine that is currently active, a deep hole in the earth with a massive digger pulling loads from its lowest depths. There’s also a stop at the storage area where coal is washed prior to shipping to Japan. Further from the active areas, a short walk down a gravel road leads to a lush-looking lake that was once a mining pit — known as an end-pit lake, it’s part of a reclamation process those leading the tour seem particularly proud of and eager to highlight.

That former mining pit, now called Sterling Lake, is open to the public, accessed via a hike and stocked with fish for recreational angling. It has not yet been certified as reclaimed nor has the land officially been passed back to the province.

Love jokes he’s been sampling drinking water for years to ensure it’s clean.

Is a better coal mine … good?

Driving through the mine, Love talks about the grizzly sow, Betty, who dens nearby and passes her unique colouring from one generation of cubs to the next. Out the window, the landscape shifts from areas replanted with fir trees, to deep pits and cuts in the land. Across the valley, clearcuts dot the hillside, which those on the tour are quick to point out are the result of logging operations and not mining — another industry, a separate problem, within view. 

The impacts on the land are clear and immense. The emissions when the product is finally burned, meanwhile, are out of sight.

It’s clear the staff at Coal Valley who spoke with The Narwhal care about the work, the site and the surrounding environment. The willingness of the company to reach out is critical to understand the nuance of its operations and its failures. 

The company is eager to point to how quickly it reports and responds to spills, and explain how those spills aren’t an apocalyptic deluge of wastewater sludge. That may be true, but it’s also clear the mine struggles to contain water not meant to flow into waterways.

The information provided by the Alberta Energy Regulator through its compliance dashboard is often unclear about the impacts of coal mining incidents. There are few details linked to most infractions beyond “sediment runoff and sediment to waterbody,” or a figure on how much sediment was measured on a given month or day. 

The regulator is also sparing in the use of enforcement powers, including fines, to deter violations. Only about $1.1 million in fines has been doled out since 2013 and more than 80 per cent were for one major incident.

Following the mine tour, Heroux said the regulator’s data can be misread. 

“The [Alberta Energy Regulator] compliance dashboard records reportable events and regulatory activity, but it does not necessarily explain why an event occurred, its environmental significance, the company’s response or the outcome of the regulator’s review,” he wrote. “Please remember that those distinctions are important when evaluating the figures.”

Not far from Coal Valley, mine operator CST Coal has been fined $53,000 for spills that took place over the past three years, and for failing to quickly report those infractions to the regulator. In one instance it waited days. The context and the failure to report contributed to the penalties, according to the regulator. 

CST Coal did not respond to questions from The Narwhal.

Driving home from the tour down Highway 40, following the length of the mine site invisible over an adjacent mound, there’s a comfort in knowing that it’s still possible to talk across divides and see firsthand where assumptions fall apart, and where they do not. 

But at the end of the day, there remains a lingering question the industry might not be able to overcome: given the impacts on the land, on water and on emissions that cause air pollution and exacerbate climate change, is it enough that a coal mine is striving to be better than its peers?

Updated on Sept. 3, 2026, at 2:35 p.m. MT: This story has been updated to reflect the fact that coal-fired electricity has been phased out in Alberta, not across all of the Prairies as was implied in a previous version.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Records from the Alberta Energy Regulator show coal mines struggle to prevent discharges of potentially harmful sediments into waterways, raising questions about impacts on water and wildlife as the Alberta government pushes to open more land to coal mining along the Rockies.

The Narwhal analyzed data from the regulator from the past three years and found there have been 42 incidents since 2023 tied to existing coal mines located in west-central Alberta, along the foothills and eastern slopes of the Rocky Mountains. All of those incidents are related to impacts on water. Many of the incidents were related to the release of sediment into nearby lakes and streams, which can be toxic for fish and other aquatic wildlife.

Of the 42 incidents, only six — 14 per cent — resulted in enforcement actions by the provincial regulator.

Going back to 2013, there have been 23 provincial enforcement actions levied against coal mines in the province, with total fines of just under $1.1 million. 

Almost all of the fines were tied to one incident, the Obed mine disaster, which dumped 670 million litres of wastewater into the Athabasca River about an hour east of Jasper, Alta. The mine’s owner was ordered to pay $925,000 in provincial fines (and $3.5 million in federal penalties), and the mine is no longer operating. 

Of the existing mines, Coal Valley, owned by Westmoreland Coal, is tied to the most incidents — 16 in total — in the past three years. The Coal Valley mine, near Hinton, Alta., produces thermal coal, used to create electricity and primarily burned in Japanese factories. But the mine’s owners say numbers alone do not tell the whole story. 

“One should consider the number of reportable events alongside their causes, environmental significance, the company’s monitoring and reporting practices, its co-operation with regulators and the corrective actions taken,” a spokesperson said in response to questions from The Narwhal. “This provides a better context for what is really happening at our mine sites.”

Coal Valley does not produce high levels of selenium

Westmoreland was the only company to respond to questions about regulatory compliance in Alberta. It also invited The Narwhal to tour the Coal Valley mine to provide more context for some of the incidents.

A significant distinction the company was eager to highlight was the fact the coal produced at its mine does not contain high levels of selenium — a claim backed up by independent environmental assessments commissioned by the company and submitted to the regulator. Selenium is a key chemical pollutant concern for most existing and potential mines along the rocky spine of the province. 

Coal mining can produce selenium, which is harmful to human and fish health if it accumulates in high quantities, as well as toxins such as arsenic, a key concern in the ongoing debate about opening new mines in the headwaters that feed rivers, lakes and streams across Alberta, Saskatchewan and into Manitoba. 

Groundwater and surface water assessments submitted to the regulator appear to show most water at Coal Valley is within guidelines for a host of contaminants, including selenium. 

Almost all of the incidents tied to Coal Valley are for exceedances of “total suspended solids” — an overabundance of debris and sediment — including one infraction in April in which the company was almost triple the allowable limit. 

The company said it was hit with heavy snow-melt that overwhelmed its systems. It also said it conducts extensive testing to evaluate potential effects and that those results “remained within applicable regulatory parameters following the event.”

The regulator, in response to questions from The Narwhal, says it will conduct its own testing “when required for enforcement activities.”

Climate change could exacerbate run-off and have significant impacts: retired government scientists

The Alberta government has waffled on its coal policy since first reopening Alberta’s Rocky Mountains to coal mining in 2020, prompting immense public backlash. It has since reinstated the earlier ban, but not before some exploration projects were approved, then it suspended those approvals and finally rescinded those suspensions to allow them to go forward as it prepares a new coal policy — anticipated this fall. A committee sought input from Albertans on a new policy in 2021.

As part of that process, some experts rang alarm bells related to heavy snow-melt akin to that experienced at Coal Valley.

Weather events overwhelming mine infrastructure is something a group of retired provincial government scientists warned about in a submission to Alberta’s coal committee.

“High snowfall run-off and major rainfall events have happened on a regular basis, often causing flows that were well above the levels that regulatory agencies and companies anticipated, included in modelling and for which infrastructure was designed and built,” wrote the five scientists. “This will be exacerbated by climate change making historic rainfall, snowfall and streamflow data increasingly out of date for planning and engineering purposes.”

Those same scientists warn that sediment and the chemicals used to treat waste “can be toxic to fish.” Sediment-laden waterbodies can also impact fish spawning and rearing, as well as aquatic insect production — food for fish. 

Katie Morrison, the executive director of the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society in southern Alberta, says there’s a lot of focus on selenium because it has such a big impact and because no mine has ever successfully prevented it from entering waterbodies. 

“I don’t think there’s too much focus on selenium, but I do think the fact that there are many other contaminants that are released is sort of lost in that conversation a little bit,” she says. 

Westmoreland says it “conducts approximately 8,000 surface-water sampling events” each year at 47 different locations around the sprawling mine, as well as groundwater, wetland and biological health monitoring. 

“We also sample 20 additional locations upstream and downstream of the mine and exceed a number of the minimum monitoring requirements contained in approvals,” the company wrote after a tour of the mine site.

Coal Valley is not alone in releasing sediment into Alberta waterways. 

‘Enforcement action may not be required’

In 2023, CST Canada Coal Ltd., which operates the Grande Cache coal mine, released wastewater into the Smoky River for 17 hours and was ultimately fined $10,000 by the provincial regulator for the release and for failure to report it for more than seven hours. 

Again, the issue was total suspended solids, but the regulator makes it clear in its report about the incident that it’s not just a question of murky water. 

The run-off can release harmful chemicals even as it settles, and fine sediment can harm fish through gill abrasion and behavioural changes.

CST was also fined $23,000 in 2024 for dumping mine wastewater into the Smoky River after a sensor malfunctioned when a pond overflowed. The company did not report the incident for five days. 

The same company was fined $20,000 by the regulator in July for another incident in 2024, which dumped at least 1 million kilograms of sediment into Sheep Creek, although the exact quantity is not known. The total suspended solids were 1,920 times the regulatory limit on the day of the release. According to the regulator, the company didn’t report the incident for more than 22 hours and when it did, it withheld important details. 

The causes of the spill included high rainfall and “known drainage problems” at the mine. 

An inspection by the regulator showed “elevated levels of metals and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons” with potential risks to bull trout spawning habitat, although that risk was listed as “unlikely.” 

The Alberta Energy Regulator, in response to questions emailed by The Narwhal, said it takes into account several factors when determining whether to fine a coal company for violations. 

“If the operator is compliant and responsive in early stages to mitigate and address incidents, further action may not be required,” wrote an unnamed spokesperson. “Also, if there is no emergency phase and little or no impact to waterbodies or wildlife, enforcement action may not be required.”

The regulator will issue orders to companies to fix an existing issue or try to mitigate impacts, issue warning letters to force compliance or, as in one case involving the Obed mine disaster, prosecute a company in court. 

“The tools we use depend on the significance of the noncompliance,” the spokesperson wrote. “We keep a record of every company’s compliance and enforcement history. If a company purposely (or repeatedly) fails to follow the rules, our enforcement actions will escalate, and the consequences will become more severe.”

Morrison says it’s not about simply punishing companies for non-compliance. 

“I don’t think we’re saying, ‘Hey, we need to immediately close down the operating mines,’ but we do need to still hold those operating mines to standards,” she says, adding there also has to be a clear path from an incident to enforcement. 

“But I think more than that, we don’t want to just penalize companies for infractions, we want to prevent those things in the first place.”

The chemistry of coal

James C. Hower has been studying coal for more than 50 years and is a research professor at the University of Kentucky. He says there’s a lot to consider when assessing the impact of coal mining on the environment, including the type and grade of coal, as well as individual companies and the regulations in place. 

“We’ve got plenty of examples in the Appalachians of people who have mining companies that, in general, are good operators and seem to be doing things the right way, and then something goes wrong,” he says. 

He cites flooding as a major risk to a well-ordered mine operation. And while he doesn’t study Alberta in particular, he says concerns over water quality are legitimate, particularly for ranchers in the south of the province, where new mines are being proposed. 

A key factor, he says, is ensuring contamination does not get out of control so that reclamation is possible.

“If it’s done wrong in the first place and things get out of hand, you got a big problem,” Hower says.

Land-use planning is supposed to precede new coal policy: conservation advocate

The province is expected to unveil its new coal policy this fall, outlining new rules for where and when a new coal mine can operate. The policy is the outcome of years of on-again off-again restrictions on coal mining in the Rockies, particularly in sensitive areas to the south. 

The policy follows public consultations by a government commission that made numerous recommendations including the need for robust land-use planning, which considers cumulative impacts from other industries and users, ahead of any coal policy that could allow new mines to operate. 

“That hasn’t happened,” Morrison says. “So they are already going ahead with a coal policy without that land-use planning.”

She says the risks to the landscape, the environment and even to coal companies, is too great to allow new mines in the province. 

“It also doesn’t make sense from a company side to say to companies, ‘Yes, you can come and pitch a project here,’ knowing that it’s actually not going to be compatible down the road if our regulatory system was working as it should be.”

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Summary

• The Alberta government has gone back and forth on coal mining in the eastern slopes of the Rocky Mountains, with major decisions followed by major reversals.
• There are three main coal mines currently active in Alberta, with at least three more projects in earlier stages of development. The majority of these produce coal used to make steel.
• Country musician Corb Lund says his petition for a referendum question about coal mining in the Rockies has enough signatures to move ahead, but the government says it can’t be included on the October ballot.

Ever since the Alberta government surprised everyone by suddenly changing the rules around coal mining in the Rocky Mountains six years ago, the province has been on a rollercoaster of regulatory changes. 

First there was the lifting of the old coal policy, followed by its reinstatement after public outrage — but not before some projects were approved. Then there was a suspension of those approvals, followed by a government review. Confused yet?

As it stands now, the government says a new coal policy to govern mining and exploration will be unveiled this year. But the last several years of back and forth have resulted in hundreds of millions of dollars (so far) in government payments to coal companies that were burned by the on-again/off-again regulatory seesawing. 

And that’s not all. There’s also recent controversy over a petition led by country musician Corb Lund to block coal exploration in the Rockies, which the government says it won’t allow on the October ballot despite Lund claiming to have enough signatures (more on that below). 

So what’s going on with coal mining in Alberta, exactly? Are there any projects operating or exploring? Will we ever have regulatory clarity from the government? 

Let’s dive in.

Quick recap of the Alberta coal mining regulatory merry-go-round, please?

As noted above, the United Conservative Party government under former premier Jason Kenney suddenly killed a long-standing coal policy in Alberta, dating back to 1976. It did so on the Friday before a long weekend in 2020, but it failed to fly under the radar. The change made it easier to mine on the eastern slopes of the Rockies — a key fresh water source for much of the country. 

The ensuing outcry forced the government to backtrack on the change in 2021, but that was far from the end of it.

A year later, the government ordered a pause on new exploration in some areas and a government committee hit the road to gather input from Albertans.

The government then instituted a moratorium on exploration and development on the eastern slopes in 2022.

That new moratorium was lifted in 2025, allowing suspended projects to move forward and new applications to be filed as the government works on a new coal policy. The policy will govern where and when a company can mine for coal on the eastern slopes; the government is currently only consulting about it with industry. 

The province also says mountaintop removal mining won’t be allowed under its new policy, but there are serious questions about what that means, and how much of a mountain can still be removed.

Along the convoluted way, companies caught up in these changes sued the province for upwards of $12 billion, although the final figure will likely be lower based on settlements to date. The province has finalized agreements with two companies for a total of $238 million, leaving three lawsuits outstanding.

Those lawsuits were a primary consideration for the government when it decided to lift the moratorium last year, according to Premier Danielle Smith.

Also worth noting is the government’s own coal policy committee, which issued a report in 2021 arguing regional and subregional land-use plans — broad rules that seek to balance multiple uses, essentially what should and should not be allowed in designated areas of the province — need to be completed before “any major coal project approvals are considered.” 

Still with us?

Are there currently coal mines in Alberta? What’s happening now?

It’s hard to keep track of it all, and to remember which mines are still moving ahead and which have decided to head for more stable (regulatory) ground. There are currently three active coal mines in Alberta, with a handful in earlier stages of development.

But it’s important to make clear that we’re mostly talking about metallurgical coal here, which is a higher-grade product used in steel production. It’s different from coal burned to create electricity.

Most of the thermal coal mines, used to provide power, have shuttered with the end of coal-fired power in the province. But not all. 

Let’s break it down by region. In the central Rockies — the area roughly west of Edmonton and adjacent to Jasper National Park — there are currently two operating thermal mines; one thermal mine expansion, Vista; and one metallurgical mine proposal, Mine 14, which was controversially approved by the Alberta Energy Regulator (appeals to come). 

A little farther south, near the town of Nordegg, another metallurgical mine is in the exploration phase. 

In the southern region, there is a metallurgical mine, also in the exploration phase. 

There’s one more mine, east of Edmonton, that sells small quantities of thermal coal directly to the public.

Which Alberta mines are the most hotly debated?

Two of the mines that have generated the most controversy are actually not currently operating.

Mine 14, in west-central Alberta, along the Rockies near Grande Cache, was scheduled to have a public hearing after the regulator gave its nod of approval to the project. That hearing was cancelled, however, after conversations between the company and the CEO of the Alberta Energy Regulator, Rob Morgan, raised questions over the independence of the energy regulator, preventing opponents from airing their concerns about the project.

A coalition of environmental organizations is appealing that cancellation in the courts.

Then, farther south, there’s the Grassy Mountain mine proposed north of the Crowsnest Pass, a traditional coal region that hasn’t seen an active mine for decades. Grassy Mountain has generated the most opposition from ranchers, environmentalists and some First Nations. It was also the subject of controversy due to conversations between Morgan, the regulator CEO, and the company behind the project, Northback. The regulator refused to disclose to The Tyee, which broke the story, what was discussed at that meeting.

Grassy Mountain was rejected in 2021 by the Alberta Energy Regulator and the federal government. The regulator said the project was not in the public interest, while the federal review said the economic benefits of the project did not outweigh the significant environmental risks. That rejection was upheld in multiple court cases, but the mine was included on a provincial government list of approved projects that were not impacted by its moratorium.

In 2024, Energy Minister Brian Jean wrote a letter to the Alberta Energy Regulator saying the project could be considered.  

“Once a project is considered an advanced project it remains as one regardless of the outcome of regulatory applications submitted before it was declared an advanced project,” Jean wrote in his letter to the regulator.

He went on to say he expected the regulator would review any applications for advanced projects. The regulator dutifully did so and the project is moving through the regulatory process.

What’s up with Corb Lund’s petition about Alberta coal mining?

There is local support for Grassy Mountain in Crowsnest Pass, which held a non-binding referendum that showed majority support for the project (even though it’s located in the neighbouring Municipal District of Ranchlands).

The Piikani First Nation, on whose traditional territory the mine would sit, says it supports exploratory drilling, but is reserving judgement on the mine itself.

But there has been significant opposition across Alberta, not only to Grassy Mountain, but to coal mining on the eastern slopes in general. 

A recent petition asking the government to either ban coal mining on the Rockies, or to ask Albertans whether they want a ban in a referendum, claims to have more than 200,000 signatures, more than enough to get the issue on the ballot in October. However, Premier Smith said it’s too late for the topic to be included amongst a long list of referendum questions being put to Albertans — all of which deal with increased provincial sovereignty or separation.

The creator of that petition, country musician Corb Lund, said the petition is being tossed aside based on a missed deadline that didn’t exist. 

“I personally met with the premier in her office on May 11. We were literally discussing the wording of my question as it should appear on the ballot, face-to-face. And at no point was any June 1 deadline mentioned,” Lund said in a statement emailed to media. 

He said the premier has the authority to put something on the ballot and that she has done so multiple times, with nine of her government’s own questions on topics ranging from more control over immigration to constitutional amendments, as well as a question on holding a separation referendum.

If the question isn’t put to Albertans in October, it will have to wait until 2027.

In addition to the petition, the government’s own survey of Albertans, conducted in 2021, showed overwhelming concern about coal development in the province. More than 85 per cent of respondents didn’t think coal development or exploration was adequately regulated, and more than 90 per cent thought it should be barred from certain areas, including the Rockies, foothills, areas near watersheds and more.

What’s next with coal mining in Alberta

The government has promised a revamped coal policy for the province this year, but there is no date and no details. It is currently consulting industry, and only industry, on the policy.The Alberta government did not respond to an email asking when the new policy will be unveiled.

In the meantime, it has approved Mine 14, the Vista thermal coal mine expansion and allowed for Grassy Mountain to conduct exploratory drilling. Valory, the company behind Mine 14, is also pushing for a new metallurgical coal mine along the Rockies called Blackstone.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

The woods surrounding the Highwood Pass, a mountain valley southwest of Calgary, are quiet. The traffic snarls of fall, which brought day trippers flocking to see larch trees pop yellow against the green hills, are gone. The road through the pass is closed until the spring. 

Gone too is a temporary camp and barrier across a logging road, set up to protest in advance of clear-cut operations in this popular corner of Kananaskis Country along the rocky spine of southwestern Alberta. At least for now. 

At first blush, it’s odd for protesters opposed to logging to leave the area before the logging starts, but that wasn’t really the point of the camp set up by a group called Defenders of the Eastern Slopes. 

“Yes, we want to protect these valleys from the logging and protect the fish from the logging, but one of our goals is also to start the process of creating a culture of civil disobedience,” one of the organizers, Michael Sawyer, says. 

It’s not something generally associated with Alberta and it’s not something Sawyer has always focused on. He’s spent decades fighting through more official/polite/formal channels: in courts, through letters, within environmental organizations and without. But in this time and place, he thinks a more direct approach is needed. 

“I would argue that, given the politics in this province, and I would even say nationally, we need more and more citizens who are prepared to stand up against undemocratic and illegal activities by the government.”

So while the camp is gone and the woods are still, the group behind regular gatherings on the outskirts of the cutblock are ready to put their bodies on the line at the first sign of activity.

“We’re keeping an eye on things,” Colin Smith, another member of Defenders of the Eastern Slopes, says. “We’ve got eyes and ears out there.”

The area in question and why it matters

The area in question is surrounded by protected land in the multi-use area known as Kananaskis Country — a mishmash of parkland, recreational spaces and industrial activity along the eastern slopes of the Rocky Mountains. 

It’s an area popular with residents of nearby Calgary, but has been set aside for logging since before Kananaskis was established. It’s also the headwaters for all of the creeks and rivers throughout southern Alberta and into the wider Prairies. 

In 2024, an earlier clear-cut plan covering 1,100 hectares, an area the size of over 2,000 football fields, was shelved after pushback and the sale of Spray Lake Sawmills to B.C.-based West Fraser Timber. Now, it’s been revived.

New permits have been issued by Fisheries and Oceans Canada for the construction of logging bridges across rivers and creeks in the valley. Those permits allow disruptions to habitat for endangered native trout species in the valley — a fact that frustrates the group.

In an emailed statement, West Fraser Timber said it understands “how important it is to protect bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout habitat in the Highwood” and that as part of its planning, the company will be “monitoring conditions before and after harvest to help inform responsible stewardship.”

The company said it paused Spray Lake’s earlier plans to “hear from people who live, work or recreate near our operations,” and added operations won’t start until its planning processes are complete. It did not say whether or not those operations would start this winter.

But it’s not just logging the group is concerned about. The eastern slopes face multiple threats, from clear-cutting to the potential for new coal mines south of Kananaskis, all of which could impact the water that flows from these headwaters across the Prairies. 

Denuded hills don’t hold on to water, which exacerbates the risk of flooding during rainfall and leaves the area more parched during droughts. Pollution from reopened mines would rush off the hills and into irrigation channels and drinking water. 

Sawyer, who lives in nearby Nanton, says his tap water comes from these hills.  

“We’re treating our foothills headwaters like they don’t matter from a water point of view, but they’re absolutely critical, and the government is just not paying attention to it,” Sawyer says.

West Fraser Timber said it will establish buffers of at least 30-metres around watercourses.The office of the Minister of Forestry and Parks did not respond to an interview request prior to publication.

We’re suing the RCMP to fight for press freedom

In November 2021, photojournalist Amber Bracken was arrested by the RCMP while on assignment for The Narwhal. So we launched a lawsuit to take a stand for press freedom. The trial recently concluded. Learn more.

The eastern slopes: ‘vital’ to ecosystems, water and more

The Rocky Mountain headwaters have been the subject of increasing concern to Albertans. The United Conservative government is working to reopen coal mining to the south of the pass, at the same time that reservoirs and rivers across the province have seen consecutive years of depletion due to droughts. 

Mike Judd, another member of the Defenders of the Eastern Slopes, says the government and industry hold too much power, which allows them to enforce a narrative focused squarely on resource extraction.  

“They have the propaganda machinery to keep a constant conservative message out there, which is the eastern slopes are a warehouse of treasures that keep the Alberta economy rolling,” he says. In his mind, that’s a narrow definition of wealth. 

“There’s not a thing in their message that’s about the eastern slopes being the vital water source for Alberta, about it being the vital place for so many different species of birds, fish and animals, and for being the vital place for so many people to have a recreational outlet.”

It’s another reason Judd and Sawyer believe civil disobedience is a necessary tool — to draw attention to their fight and, as Judd puts it, “rattle the chains” a little. 

Starting in October, the defenders hosted weekend events nearby, to introduce people to the issues and the idea of civil disobedience. The community made art that could be hung on the barrier across the logging road. 

Without any current logging or bridge building to oppose, there was no standoff or risk of arrest — yet. 

“It’s just giving people who have been interested in doing something like this a place to show up and meet other people,” Smith says.

“This hopefully can be a catalyst to future actions.”

Group hopes to ‘bridge political polarization’ over shared concern for headwaters

The Defenders of the Eastern Slopes isn’t solely focused on the Highwood Pass. The group might plan blockades in other areas of the vast stretch of woods and mountains that skirt the border of B.C. and Alberta, according to Smith. 

He’s been contacted by the RCMP, who sent out a liaison officer and he’s heard the company doesn’t plan to start operations this winter, but there’s no confirmation as yet. 

The RCMP did not response to a request for comment by publication time.

Smith says the threats to the region are a unifying force. He said that, while at the camp this fall, he had conversations with hunters and a coal worker that involved both disagreement, and finding common ground.

“Water and land protection and stewardship can bridge political polarization — especially water,” he says. “Most people can agree that we need clean water.”

— With files from Amber Bracken

Updated on Dec. 19, 2025, at 10:39 a.m MT: This story has been corrected to identify larch trees properly. Lark trees, as previously written, is not a tree species.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Senior Alberta government officials stalled the submission of a coal mine pollution study to a scientific journal and prevented the lead researcher from speaking publicly about his work, according to records The Narwhal obtained through a freedom of information request.

Emails included among more than 600 pages of documents show officials delayed government scientist Colin Cooke from submitting a study about selenium pollution in the McLeod River watershed for four months after it was complete. The records also indicate Cooke was not permitted to participate in at least two media interviews or speak to a community group about his research, raising concerns the province is muzzling scientists and restricting the public’s access to tax-payer funded research.

The delays came as Alberta was embroiled in a public debate about the future of coal mining in the Rockies, with the government lifting its moratorium on coal mining in the eastern slopes not long after Cooke eventually got the greenlight to submit his study.

Cooke, an aquatic scientist who works for Alberta Environment and Protected Areas, has led multiple studies into the impacts of coal mining in Alberta’s Rocky Mountains. Working with scientists both inside and outside of government, Cooke’s research found historic coal mines in the Crowsnest Pass continue to pollute nearby waterways decades after they closed. He found snowpacks have been contaminated by windblown pollution from coal mines in southeast B.C. And more recently, he and his co-authors found concerning selenium concentrations in fish from Crowsnest Lake.

In a study published in October, Cooke and his co-authors found selenium concentrations downstream of three coal mines in the McLeod River watershed exceeded guidelines meant to protect aquatic life. This was after the mines were considered to be partially, and in one case almost entirely, reclaimed. While a small amount of selenium is essential for life, too much can be toxic, leading to deformities in fish and, in a worst-case scenario, reproductive collapse.

The research found reclamation — the process of restoring land impacted by mining to a state of equivalent capability as compared to before the mining — had so far failed to return selenium concentrations to pre-mining levels in a watershed that’s home to two at-risk fish species. The findings called into question the effectiveness of Alberta’s regulatory and mine restoration policies. It was this study Cooke was prevented from submitting for months after it was complete.

“It showed very clear impacts — negative impacts — on downstream water quality,” Bill Donahue, a co-author on the study and former head of environmental monitoring for the Alberta government, told The Narwhal.

“What our paper, I think, makes fairly clear is that there’s pretty much an utter failure of environmental management regulation and enforcement in relation to coal mining,” he said.

The Narwhal requested interviews with both Cooke and Environment and Protected Areas Minister Rebecca Schulz. Neither was granted.

Instead, in an emailed statement the minister’s press secretary Ryan Fournier said, “We take this issue seriously. That’s why we conducted this research, published it and even paid extra to make the paper open access and publicly available.” The journal that published Cooke’s McLeod River study, Environmental Pollution, allows authors or their institutions to make the study freely available without a subscription for a fee. “We’re conducting more research into coal remediation, and being more transparent, than any other government in Alberta’s history,” Fournier said.For Donahue, interference in the release and public communication of science is a major concern. “It’s really erosive to accountable and responsible government,” he said. And, he added, it raises serious questions like, “What else is not being published or released or communicated?”

Scientist repeatedly told to hold off submitting study to journal: internal emails

Cooke approached his superiors at Alberta Environment and Protected Areas in December 2023 to arrange briefings for senior officials about the McLeod River research, emails show. He noted the study, while not yet complete, could have “significant implications” for both Alberta Environment and the Alberta Energy Regulator.

Multiple pages in the records The Narwhal obtained were redacted, but they show the director of watershed sciences emailed Cooke months later, in mid-June 2024, to “reiterate the request to hold off on submitting the McLeod manuscript to a journal” until the Alberta Energy Regulator had been briefed.

That message, to hold off submitting the paper until leadership briefings were done, was repeated again by the executive director of the airshed and watershed stewardship branch in early July. “That message and direction is not unique to this manuscript, this topic area, or even our branch,” she said.

Later that month Cooke emailed the executive director and assistant deputy minister with the final manuscript. “Now that we have briefed the [Alberta Energy Regulator] on the paper are we ok to submit the manuscript? I was hoping to submit it next Friday (August 2),” he wrote.

That date came and went. In September, a briefing note about the new study was prepared for the minister. It noted the government had previously faced criticism for not analyzing environmental monitoring data sets or releasing draft reports based on environmental data. “This current report is now ready to be shared with other departments and submitted to a peer-reviewed scientific journal,” it said.

At the end of September, Cooke again emailed his superiors to ask if he was allowed to submit the study to the journal and was again told to wait.

The scientist followed up again in mid-October and early November.

In a statement, Fournier said, “This study took about two years to complete. Internal reviews are standard practice and necessary. This review period generated additional feedback on the paper — including as late as November 2024 — and helped assess if additional monitoring or other changes were needed.”

Concerns raised that Alberta has ‘returned to muzzling our scientists’

In mid-November 2024, Donahue, who left the government in 2019, expressed frustration about the delays in an email to Cooke. He said he would submit it himself if Cooke wasn’t allowed to.

“I suggest you inform the [assistant deputy minister] and chief scientist that I simply don’t accept that they are refusing to permit the publication of our manuscript, and that they should remind themselves of their legal duties, as stipulated by the Alberta’s Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act,” Donahue wrote in the email, which he shared with The Narwhal.

He said senior officials should be asking themselves, “What is worse, the public learning how badly coal mining in Alberta has been harming downstream water quality and aquatic ecosystems, or the public learning how badly coal mining in Alberta has been harming downstream water quality and aquatic ecosystems and that we’ve returned to muzzling our scientists in an attempt to cover it up while the government tries to convince Albertans that coal mining is environmentally benign?”

Six days later, Cooke, who had just returned from vacation, forwarded the email to his director. A week after that, he was allowed to submit the paper.

“I’m quite confident that my letter shook some trees,” Donahue said.

From his perspective there was no reasonable justification for the government to delay the study’s submission to a journal. He said there had been ample opportunity for briefings and noted it can take several months to go through the peer-review process after a study is submitted to a journal before it’s published.

By this point, Alberta had been embroiled, for years, in a fierce debate over the prospect of a renewed metallurgical coal mining industry in the eastern slopes of the Rockies (metallurgical coal is used in steel-making, as opposed to electricity generation). In January, not long after Cooke got the green-light to submit his study, the Alberta government rescinded the moratorium on coal mining in the eastern slopes it put in place in 2021 and 2022. The moratorium had come in response to public backlash to a government decision in 2020 to cancel the province’s previous long-standing coal policy from 1976.

Last December, Energy Minister Brian Jean said the province would return to the 1976 policy as it developed a new coal policy. He said the new policy, yet to be released, would require new mines to be underground or to use technologies to prevent selenium from entering waterways. But these measures would not apply to projects considered to be “advanced,” including the controversial proposal for the Grassy Mountain mine in the Crowsnest Pass.

Cooke’s paper, which was eventually published in October 2025, summarized decades of government and industry water quality monitoring at three Rocky Mountain coal mines in Alberta. Donahue noted the early years of data, now a couple decades old, revealed concerning selenium concentrations downstream of the mines. But little was done to address it, he said, suggesting the province has largely viewed monitoring as “a box-checking exercise.”

“Alberta Environment and the Alberta Energy Regulator have been asleep at the switch for 20 plus years when it comes to responding to clear evidence of very harmful downstream effects from coal mining,” he said.

Katie Morrison, executive director of the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society’s southern Alberta chapter, said it’s “really frustrating to see the government trying to keep information from the public, but especially on something as important as water quality.”

“Albertans are really aware of and really concerned about the quality of our water in general, but particularly in this context of coal mining,” she said. “Research like this that shows these risks is so important to have in those conversations, so that we can hold the government accountable.”

Scientist prevented from accepting media request, community speaking invitation, emails suggest

As senior officials delayed the submission of the McLeod River study, Cooke was also seemingly being prevented from speaking to the media and community groups about previous research into coal mine pollution, emails included in the document release suggest.

In January 2024, a reporter for The Canadian Press requested an interview with either Cooke or co-author Craig Emmerton, another government scientist, about their recently published study describing lasting water quality impacts from more than a century of coal mining in Crowsnest Pass, the released emails show.

The executive director of airshed and watershed stewardship indicated in an email to Cooke that she was supportive of an interview, as was the director of communications and the assistant deputy minister. Days later, word came down from the assistant deputy minister that the minister’s office had taken the lead on the request.

The Canadian Press article was published later that month. The reporter noted neither of the government scientists involved in the study were made available for an interview.

In a statement to The Narwhal, Fournier, Schulz’s press secretary said, “The authors of these studies are trained scientists, not government spokespersons.”

In June 2024, Cooke received an interview request from a CBC producer to appear on the morning show in Kelowna the next day to talk about another study, which found toxic contaminants from coal mines in B.C.’s Elk Valley in snowpacks in the region. According to the emails, Cooke was told to direct the producer to Fournier, the minister’s press secretary.

“That’s the process for all media inquiries,” the director of communications for Alberta Environment and Protected Areas wrote in an email to Cooke. “[The minister’s office] will then assess and advise from there.”

The next day CBC’s Daybreak South interviewed co-author Alison Criscitiello, the director of the Canadian Ice Core Lab at the University of Alberta, not Cooke, who was the lead author.

Then, in September 2024, the Livingstone Landowners Group of ranchers and landowners concerned about the risks of coal mining on the eastern slopes of the Rockies invited Cooke to speak to their community about his research.

“I would like to do this,” Cooke wrote in an email to the director of watershed sciences asking what approvals he’d need. The director responded that she was supportive but said Cooke would need approval from the assistant deputy minister.

In an interview, Bill Trafford, the president of the Livingstone Landowners Group said Cooke was not able to present to the group.

“It’s very concerning because it’s very germane to the issues that we’re trying to deal with,” Trafford said. “I’m really surprised they can take a scientist and say he’s not allowed to present his material publicly.”

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

The fate of a massive coal mine expansion on the doorsteps of Jasper National Park is now in the hands of Alberta’s energy regulator. 

The company submitted a formal application in April. It comes three months after the province officially lifted its moratorium on new coal mine development on the eastern slopes, though the proposed expansion was not subject to the moratorium.

While most of the political attention in the province has been focused on opening mines along the southern stretch of the mountain range, the existing Vista coal mine has been working to significantly extend its production of thermal coal, burned to generate electricity. 

“Simply put, the Vista expansion would carve up the Rocky Mountains, threaten endangered species, Indigenous Rights, water quality and community health,” Fraser Thomson, a staff lawyer with Ecojustice who represents Keepers of the Water and the West Athabasca Watershed Bioregional Society in opposition of the project, said in an interview. 

The expansion has faced delays as the federal Impact Assessment Agency mulled a review of the project before ultimately deciding not to proceed with an assessment, which would have considered adverse impacts on areas under federal jurisdiction including migratory birds, waterways and fish. Instead, it will be up to the Alberta Energy Regulator to conduct a provincial assessment and determine whether to approve the company’s application.

Thomson describes it as one of the last regulatory hurdles for the U.S.-based owners to clear, and it’s not yet known how substantive the review will be. 

“If the [Alberta Energy Regulator] decides that this will be undertaken quickly, with little public involvement, then that poses pretty significant risks,” he said. “As most Albertans know, there can be profound impacts from development of coal in our Rocky Mountains.”

The issue has been front and centre in the province ever since the United Conservative government of Jason Kenney first removed a moratorium on coal mining along the Rockies and then bowed to public pressure to reinstate the old rules. The current government has once again lifted the decades-old restrictions.

Public concerns over water contamination and pollution, particularly among ranchers and nearby municipalities were central concerns, as was the idea of open-pit mines along the Rocky Mountains. 

The regulator is accepting statements of concern regarding the project until May 22. Coral Hulse, a spokesperson for the regulator, said anyone who believes they may be adversely impacted by the project can submit a statement, and that those statements can prolong the process. 

Hulse also said it hasn’t been determined whether the project will have a public hearing. 

“Our decision to hold a hearing is made on a case-by-case basis,” she wrote in response to questions from The Narwhal.

Proposed new phase of coal mine would extend production by 12 years

The Vista mine, owned by Coalspur Mines Ltd., is located approximately 280 kilometres west of Edmonton, nestled into the eastern slopes of the Rockies near the town of Hinton, Alta. All of the coal produced at the mine is shipped by rail and then overseas where it is used to create electricity. 

Opened in 2019, the mine currently has a maximum production limit of 7.5 million tonnes of coal per year, but the company says that’s expected to drop in the coming years, before tapering off completely by 2032 when the first phase of the mine will close. 

“Phase II is effectively a continuation of the Vista Mine surface mine,” the company said in its application to the regulator. “It is proposed to commence in 2026, when current mine fleets would expect to be reduced, and it will operate for 12 years, therefore prolonging the life of the mine and sustain the full workforce for an additional 12 years.”

It expects the expansion will produce 5.5 million tonnes of coal per year. In 2022, Canada produced 19.3 million tonnes of thermal coal, a decline of more than 15 million tonnes from 2013.

Coalspur Mines has asked for access to 5.4 billion litres of water as part of its application to the regulator. 

Daniel Cheater, another Ecojustic lawyer working on the Vista mine file, said the bulk of the water will be taken from the McLeod River, a critical habitat for rainbow and bull trout, both of which are listed as species at risk.

“Coalspur has also consistently demonstrated a failure to manage tailings from the existing Phase I of the Vista coal mine,” he added, noting the company’s own application says water from tailings will seep through into the nearby McPherson Creek “approximately 11 to 160 years” after wastewater stops flowing into the ponds.

The project could also completely dry up both McPherson Creek and one of its tributaries. The company plans to divert water from the McLeod River post-mining, but notes recovery will take decades.

The company did not respond to an interview request. 

Company behind the mine entered creditor protection in 2021

The existing mine has not been without its challenges. 

In 2021, two years after it opened, the mine entered into creditor protection as its finances collapsed. It clawed its way back to life in 2022, in part by avoiding full payment of debts to local businesses. 

When it initiated creditor protection proceedings, Coalspur owed nearly $5 million to local businesses, ranging from car dealerships to oilfield services to welding shops.In the final affidavit submitted as part of the creditor protection process by Coalspur’s president and CEO Michael Beyer, an American living in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, Beyer said emerging from the proceedings intact, as opposed to a fire sale of assets, was a better outcome for all creditors and would enable relationships into the future.

The mine is a significant economic driver in the region and is supported by the Ermineskin Cree Nation, which has signed benefit agreements with Coalspur.

A representative with the nation’s consultation department did not respond to an interview request prior to publication. 

Mine expansion will benefit U.S. company during trade war: lawyer

The expansion comes at a time of heightened international political and economic tension, not to mention the increasing threat of climate change. The proposal also clashes with a pledge by the federal Liberal government in 2021 to phase out exports of thermal coal by 2030. 

“It’s hard to see how it benefits our country to allow this company to build one of the biggest thermal coal mines in Canadian history on the edge of Jasper National Park,” Thomson said. 

“I think a lot of Canadians right now think that we should be investing in Canadian industries and preserving our export capacity, the limited export capacity that we have, for goods that keep profits inside our country and that don’t just profit American companies.”

Thomson is also concerned about the emissions impacts of amping up coal production.

The company says it expects emissions from its operations to be approximately 352,000 tonnes per year. That does not account for the carbon dioxide that would be released when the coal is ultimately used; burning 5.5 million tonnes of coal generates about twice that mass in carbon dioxide. Thomson said the emissions from the mine at peak production could be equivalent to that of four million cars, when factoring in burning the coal overseas. 

“Given the events of the last few months, we often lose sight of the fact that we are also in a climate crisis, and thermal coal is one of the world’s dirtiest fossil fuels,” he said. “It really has no place in a world serious about tackling the climate crisis.”

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

We’re back into an endless cycle of speculation and concern around every twitch, smile, off-hand comment and full-throttled assault on rights and democracy from the second presidency of Donald Trump. 

The week has once again been dominated by talk of what Trump will do, how it will impact us and what we should do about it all. He’s also really not letting go of this 51st state stuff.

Alberta, as in so many national debates, is at the centre of it all. 

From tariffs to statehood, to allegations of selling out the country and the province, it’s been a doozy. Oh — and we’re really doing this Rocky Mountains coal thing. 

It’s Trump’s world because we make it so

You’d be forgiven for thinking that everything that doesn’t have to do with the United States has been put on pause. We’ve solved every other problem, our only worry is Trump now. 

On Thursday, he told a crowd of so-called globalist elites that the U.S. doesn’t need what Canada’s got, but also reiterating that we should become the 51st state.

“We don’t need their oil and gas,” he said to a crowd at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. “We have more than anybody.”

Meanwhile, the debate at home continues to be about the best response to tariff threats. Smith continues to be an outlier as she insists that both adding a federal export tax on oil and gas and withholding oil and exports should be off the table in negotiations. But it appears the collective mood among premiers is shifting away from aggression as others back away from including energy, or their own economic drivers, from inclusion in any retaliatory measures. 

Put another way, a unified front that doesn’t give away national strategies is folding like a Made in the USA T-shirt. 

Beyond the political impacts of fighting in public on how to respond to a bully, there are some serious conversations underway about the Canadian economy, reliance on the U.S. as a customer and what we can actually do about it all. 

Some say hit ‘em hard, including treating folks like Elon Musk like a Russian oligarch. Others suggest getting our own house in order, removing internal trade barriers and, yes, ensuring we don’t gamble with the oil and gas sector. 

Amid all the bluster, it’s likely the tension is something the premier and her advisors welcome. 

After all, Rob Anderson, one of Smith’s closest political confidants, penned the secessionist Free Alberta Strategy that calls for the province to “replace the federal government as acting authority to negotiate Alberta’s international trade and market access relationship.”

These Rocky Mountains coal announcements have funny timing …

It’s probably just a coincidence, but the Alberta government seems to make all its big announcements about bringing coal mining back to the Rockies on days where it might not be noticed. 

Just before Christmas, the government announced a new policy that would allow coal mining to return. Then, on Jan. 20, when nothing at all was happening in the United States related to mass deportations, renewed interest in manifest destiny and attacks on rights and diversity, equity and inclusion policies, the Alberta Energy Regulator announced the government had lifted its moratorium on coal mining on the eastern slopes. 

There was no news release from the Alberta government. 

Weird. 

The announcements have also been couched in misleading or confusing language, including the assertion the government’s new policy would prevent open-pit mining. 

The St. Albert Gazette pushed for an explanation of what that meant and it turns out strip mining is indeed allowed under the new regulations. Details TBD. 

Smith has said lawsuits against the province for first promising new coal mines (under former premier Jason Kenney) and then doing an abrupt about-face, might have been a factor in the new coal push. 

Again with the hunting?

Forestry and Parks Minister Todd Loewen continues his charm offensive about how great it is to hunt things in Alberta. He’s in Nashville, Tenn., attending Safari Club International’s convention (not a single insinuation that any wildlife will be stripping, which is disappointing from a comedic perspective). The organization’s mission? “To defend the freedom to hunt — from elk to elephant, rabbits to rhinos.”

Totally coincidentally, Safari Club International happens to be a favourite of the Trump family, too. A few years ago, the convention included an auction for a week-long, yacht-based “dream hunt” with the US president’s son Donald Trump Jr. It appears the hunt was successful, as all dreams are now dead. 

This time around, Loewen is there to promote Alberta’s “incredible wilderness” and hype the minister’s special licences for elk, mule deer, moose, pronghorn, cougar, whitetail deer and wild turkey, which will be auctioned off in Salt Lake City in February. 

The minister, who has previously declared income from Red Willow Outfitters in his ethics disclosures, hasn’t listed any income in his latest filing. Registry documents show the company, previously named Todd Loewen Outfitting Ltd., is now run by family members, including his wife. 

The licence means the lucky hunter can shoot an animal anytime of year, another example of Alberta being the freest province in Canada, unless you’re into public health or are, I guess, a hunted animal. 

Listen, maybe now is not the best time to invite armed Americans to visit Alberta. Just sayin’.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Last week, the Alberta government released a draft map outlining new buffer zones prohibiting new wind energy developments, saying “wind projects are no longer permitted in the buffer zones due to the impact of their vertical footprint.” 

Speaking to the media in late February, Alberta’s Affordability and Utilities Minister Nathan Neudorf had announced the government’s plan to establish 35-kilometre buffer zones around protected areas and other “pristine viewscapes.” Neudorf added there is no universal definition of what constitutes a pristine viewscape, but generally refers to “areas that are unobstructed, natural landscapes.”

The buffer zones in the draft map encompass much of the eastern slopes of the Rocky Mountains, extending as far east as Calgary. It’s an area dotted with oil and gas facilities and coal mines. Much of the area has been farmed or logged.

In other areas not totally off-limits, the government said renewable energy projects will have to pass through increased regulatory scrutiny in the form of “visual impact assessments.”

As Evan Wilson of the Canadian Renewable Energy Association has pointed out, the Alberta government’s new rules — from pristine viewscapes and beyond — apply only to the renewables industry. “Why is this something that is just impacting wind and solar?” he asked, speaking to CBC. 

Wind turbines have been getting larger, with towers double the average height compared to 20 years ago, and some new turbines stretching upwards of 200 metres tall. Other permitted activities are not as tall as a turbine, but that doesn’t mean they should be treated differently, according to the Alberta Utilities Commission. 

The commission, the regulator of power development in the province which conducted the government-ordered inquiry into renewable energy development, said in its first report any prohibition to “achieve viewscape protection” should be “industry agnostic” and “apply to all forms of development within the restricted zone.”

A spokesperson for Neudorf confirmed only new wind energy projects would be barred from the buffer zones, but said all forms of generation, including natural gas plants, would be subject to visual impact assessments in other specified areas.

Geoff Scotton, a spokesperson for the Alberta Utilities Commission, said the organization has no information on when areas off-limits to wind development will be more clearly defined and that it is “up to the Government of Alberta.”

With wind energy likely off the table in large swaths of the province — and new restrictions on solar farms in others — here’s a look at some of the things Albertans can still do in those “unobstructed, natural landscapes.”

1. Urban sprawl is continuing in Alberta’s draft ‘pristine viewscape’ regions

As the Alberta government seeks to create buffer zones around many of the Rocky Mountain national parks — extending as far east as Calgary — there has been no indication that construction would be stopped on new developments and urban sprawl. 

In Canmore — approximately five kilometres from the boundary of Banff National Park — plans have forged ahead for a massive new development that would take up almost all of its remaining developable land, nearly double the population and eat into critical wildlife habitat.

In Calgary, numerous new communities have been approved on the city’s outskirts extending west towards Bragg Creek. Cochrane too has seen rapid population growth — a 23 per cent increase in five years and much faster than officials had predicted — and now predicts “increased demand for land to support this growth.”

All of this means urban boundaries are likely to sprawl farther, into land that is part of the government’s buffer around pristine viewscapes and protected areas. 

2. Logging applications are ongoing in Kananaskis Country — now off limits to new wind energy projects

Kananaskis Country is something of an iconic outdoor destination for Calgarians and tourists alike — more than four million people visited in 2023. In Kananaskis, provincial parks are knitted together with public lands and recreation areas with varying levels of protection: some are off limits to most activities while others are open to industry. Just 60 per cent of the region is fully protected.

That means logging continues in the area — with cutblocks often earmarked smackdab in the middle of wilderness destinations. According to the Alberta government’s new map of buffer zones, no wind turbines will be allowed in Kananaskis Country, but the government has made no similar move to create a blanket ban on logging. Plans to log areas like West Bragg Creek, for example, are moving ahead. Canadian forestry company West Fraser Timber, which recently bought Alberta-based Spray Lake Sawmills, is allowed to log approximately 800 hectares in the area in 2026.

3. Investments in pulp mill is being celebrated by the government just outside of Jasper National Park

Farther north, West Fraser Timber also has rights to log a wide area along the border with Jasper National Park, and just days after the buffer zone map was released, the government celebrated investment in an existing pulp mill in Hinton, within the no-go zone for wind turbines.

“Our investment-friendly policies, competitive corporate tax rate and highly educated workforce continue to draw in world-class companies that can feel confident about spending their money here,” a government statement said as the new investments in the pulp mill were announced.

4. Coal mining is not explicitly prohibited under Alberta’s new draft ‘pristine viewscape’ plans

The eastern slopes of the Rocky Mountains were the focus of much outrage when the previous United Conservative Party government tried to open up large swaths of them to coal mining in 2020. That decision was ultimately reversed, but a number of projects — essentially grandfathered in — were allowed to carry on. Coal mines are currently operating in communities from Grande Cache to Hinton, which are areas that overlap with the Alberta government’s new draft map of buffer zones around protected areas, with a large focus on the eastern slopes of the Rocky Mountains. 

In March 2022, the Government of Alberta decided four “advanced” coal mine proposals would be allowed to proceed despite a moratorium on coal development in Alberta’s eastern slopes. 

Those advanced proposals include Summit Coal Mine 14. That new project will be four kilometres northeast of Grande Cache on Grande Mountain, a forested peak popular with hikers, horseback riders and snowmobilers, that is within the new no-go zone for wind turbines. The mine would create a footprint of 53.5 hectares on the mountain and would involve 91 drill holes, creating an underground footprint of 512 hectares.

The Northback Grassy Mountain open-pit coal mine is currently being considered by the provincial regulator even after it was rejected twice in previous years, and new mining activities are underway at the Vista Mine near Hinton — both of which fall into the buffer zones on the government’s draft map.

5. There are no blanket bans on what landowners can do with their land, from RV storage fields to mega mansions

The Alberta government’s ban on wind turbines in buffer zones around protected areas and pristine viewscapes includes large swaths of private land. Landowners will no longer be permitted to agree to lease their land to a renewable energy company to build wind turbines — but they can’t say no to leasing it to an oil and gas company. 

The government has also made no moves to restrict other uses of private land: from building mega mansions to starting RV storage lots, both of which can be a common site along some stretches. Landowners must apply for the necessary development permits but face no blanket ban based on their impacts on the viewscapes or protected areas.

6. Drilling for oil and gas continues across much of the province, including in wind energy no-go zones

Oil and gas wells are a common sight on Alberta’s landscape, stretching from the mountains all the way into Saskatchewan to the east. 

In 2024, there were 328,436 wells in Alberta that had not yet been reclaimed. Approximately 157,000 of them are currently active and producing fossil fuels. 

The Alberta government has not announced any new restrictions on oil and gas development in the buffer zones now off limits to wind turbines.

7. Fracking is using increasing amounts of water in areas off-limits to new wind energy projects

The buffer zone is a hotbed of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, in Alberta.

The major formations where oil and gas is held in tight, rocky spaces far underground all kiss the edge of the western buffer zone. This includes the Cardium formation, which extends the length of the zone from Grande Prairie in the north down to the U.S. border.

Fracking activity is sparse in the south, picks up west of Calgary and then intensifies dramatically moving north adjacent to Jasper.

As drought threatens the province, new drilling continues to be approved by the Alberta Energy Regulator — though some areas are facing the possibility of such an intense water shortage that fossil fuel companies have been warned they might be forced to cut back. 

Overall water use for fracking saw a 252 per cent increase between 2013 and 2022. Intensity of water use has increased even more, a 260 per cent change, according to the regulator. 

In 2022 producers used 25.4 billion litres of water for fracking.

Updated on April 4, 2024, at 2:44 p.m. MT: This story was updated to say the pulp mill near Hinton is not new, as previously stated, but will receive significant investments under a new owner.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Raymond Hill has been traversing the wilderness on Grande Mountain near Grande Cache, Alta., on horseback for more than 40 years. He regularly encounters elk, moose and grizzly bears out on the trails. In the summer, he casts lines into the Smoky River for trout and walleye. “It’s a nice place to enjoy, or to sit by a fire and get some peace and quiet,” Hill says.

But a new coal mine on the eastern slopes of the Rockies means that peace on Grande Mountain may soon be threatened. 

An underground coal mining project named Summit Mine 14 has been quietly resurrected by Valory Resources, an Australian mining company, leaving many residents with questions about how the project got the green light, and whether it will truly benefit the community.

Grande Cache was a town purpose-built for coal in the 1960s. But as the community’s fortunes rose — and fell — with coal’s boom-and-bust cycles over the years, many residents are leery of once again betting their futures on coal. And despite the company’s promises of economic benefits, local business owners suggest a burgeoning local ecotourism industry may be at odds with more coal development, and are raising questions about the mine’s environmental impacts. 

“It’s going to be like putting a coal mine on the ridge overlooking Jasper,” Hill, the president of the Grande Cache Saddle Club, says. “But it’s ‘Jasper, without the rules.’ ” 

Jules Desrochers’ leased ranch is located downstream of the proposed mine. He’s worried about the risks of contamination and runoff into the stream, which flows into Grande Cache Lake. Desrochers, a member of the Métis Nation of Alberta, runs Elk Ridge Quarter Horses, where, along with his wife, they offer camping and horseback-riding. 

“There are so many potential impacts on air quality, water quality, wildlife, grizzly bears, goats, sheep — everything is living on that mountain,” Desrochers says.

“I just don’t see this as something that is publicly and environmentally safe at all. I am not anti-industry. I work in the oil and gas industry. But I think it’s important that people be able to be heard about why we don’t want this in our backyard.”

Grande Cache community members say they’ve been left in the dark about coal mine plans

The site of the proposed coal mine, not far from the headwaters of the Smoky River, is dense with conifers and serves as habitat for big horned sheep and elk. This wilderness is part of the eastern slopes ecosystem that was at the centre of intense outcry when the provincial government moved to open much of it to coal mining in 2020.

The Summit Coal Mine 14 project will be located four kilometres northeast of Grande Cache on Grande Mountain, a forested peak popular with hikers, horseback riders and snowmobilers. Mine 14 would create a footprint of 53.5 hectares on the mountain and would puncture the surface with 91 drill holes, ultimately creating an underground footprint of 512 hectares. The company aims to produce 3,562 tonnes of coal per day for nine years, transporting it in trucks to a coal processing plant at the nearby HR Milner Generating Station, where it will then be shipped by rail for export to Asia and used in steelmaking. 

Though the Alberta government ultimately reversed its decision to open the eastern slopes to coal mining in response to public backlash, Mine 14 slipped through the cracks, according to conservation advocates. Mining the eastern slopes remains an issue in the Alberta election, with the NDP promising to put an end to it outright. What an NDP win and all-out ban could mean for Mine 14 is not yet clear.

“Last spring, Alberta had a very robust, detailed conversation about the future of coal mining in the eastern slopes and our headwaters. Albertans very clearly articulated that they did not want new coal development,” Tara Russell, the Northern Alberta program director at the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society Northern Alberta, says. “It feels like that was ignored.” 

According to Russell, Mine 14 “came out of nowhere.”

The underground mine plan has been around for years, with little fanfare. It was first proposed in 2008 by Milner Power and received approvals a few years later. For over a decade, Mine 14 has remained undeveloped — many forgot about it entirely.

Then in March 2022, Mine 14 was listed by the Government of Alberta as one of the four “advanced” projects allowed to proceed despite a moratorium on coal development in Alberta’s eastern slopes. Two of those projects, Grassy Mountain and Tent Mountain, have since been halted. A proposed expansion to the Vista coal mine near Hinton has been stalled by a federal review.

Mine 14, however, forged ahead. The same day the Alberta government announced the exemption, Valory Resources met with town councillors of the Municipal District of Greenview to pitch a business proposal for Mine 14. (Tyler Olsen, the reeve for the Municipal District of Greenview, declined an interview about Mine 14 and Valory Resources did not respond to requests for an interview.) The company’s initial plan had mining operations beginning by October of last year.

Hill, along with the members of the Saddle Club board, only learned the project was moving forward last June. That month, the group received a letter from Valory Resources subsidiary Summit Coal Inc., informing them that they’d be building a 6.5-kilometre access road through a corner of their lease. Alarmed, the group wrote back to Summit Coal stating they did not consent to Mine 14, and requesting a stakeholder consultation meeting by late August. 

They never heard back.

Earlier this year, the saddle club received a second letter stating, “Summit Coal has now decided to proceed with this project.” Shocked, Hill phoned the company and told them about the letter the Saddle Club had sent months earlier. According to Hill, after initially saying they “couldn’t find it,” a representative found the letter and assured Hill it would get “to the right department.”

“That’s the last I heard of that,” Hill says. 

Local Indigenous groups requested federal review of proposed coal mine

The perceived lack of information around Mine 14 has Hill and other members of the Saddle Club worried. Tina Tippe is one of them. Tippe, a retired X-ray technologist and Grande Cache resident since 1977, says the project will be visible from town, and trucks carrying coal will likely spread coal dust through the region.

Hill shares that concern. He knows well how big an impact the dust can have. He used to work at another local coal mine, the Grande Cache mine, currently owned by CST Coal Inc., which has experienced enormous instability since it opened in 1969. “All of our trucks we brought in back and forth were full of dust and coal falling off of them,” Hill says. “I don’t know how they’re going to control that.”

The Aseniwuche Winewak Nation is also concerned about coal dust, which has been linked to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), including bronchitis and emphysema, among other issues. Last summer, the Nation filed a petition for review of Mine 14 under the federal Impact Assessment Act, citing health concerns of coal dust, water contamination, potential effects on fish and species at risk and disruption of land-based, traditional practices of Indigenous Peoples. 

A month later, four more nations — the Emineskin Cree Nation, Cadotte Lake Métis Nation, Duncan’s First Nation and Whitefish Lake First Nation #128 — followed suit, each requesting a federal review.

Minister of Environment and Climate Change Steven Guilbeault denied the requests for the review of Mine 14 late last year, saying consultation with Indigenous Peoples would be taken care of through other channels, like provincial legislation and other federal approvals.

For its part, the company behind Mine 14 says it intends to engage and consult Indigenous communities “for mutual benefit including jobs, contracts and direct ownership through investment.”

Aseniwuche Winewak Nation isn’t convinced the mine is to its benefit.

“Do we want mining as a community? Do we want to see this mine developed the way it’s proposed? My answer is no,” David MacPhee, president of the Nation, says. “Our experience with mines … has been very harsh to our community.”

‘We’d prefer to see no coal mines operating’: Aseniwuche Winewak Nation

Members of the Aseniwuche Winewak Nation identify as Cree, Stoney, Iroquois, Beaver, Shuswap and Saulteaux. “We are not Treaty,” MacPhee says. “When Treaty 8 was signed to the north of us in 1899, we were never included.” In 1907, the Aseniwuche Winewak were evicted from Jasper National Park and relocated to the territory to the north. Without Treaty Rights, the Aseniwuche Winewak Nation has historically lacked access to services and consultation processes with government and industry.

When the town of Grande Cache was built in the 1960s, life changed drastically for the Aseniwuche Winewak Nation. Initially, MacPhee says, they weren’t consulted on development projects and sacred burial sites were lost. “Our community was not acknowledged as a community,” MacPhee says. 

The Aseniwuche Winewak Nation was first formally consulted on Mine 14 in 2009 by Maxim Power. While the Nation supported the project at the time, MacPhee says those consultations are now 14 years old and the project has since changed ownership.

“In our heart of hearts, we’ve always said, ‘we’d prefer to see no coal mines operating,’ ” he says, adding coal mining has long disrupted traditional ways of life for Indigenous people. 

He points to the cost of cumulative effects of resource development on their traditional territories due to logging, oil and gas, and coal mining.

“People trap and hunt. People gather medicines. People go there for mental health. People go there to teach to pass on their traditions. People go there to pray,” MacPhee says. 

“In terms of disruption, yes, there is a definite disruption,” he says. “Some of the mining projects we have seen to date, that are potentially 50 years old, have never been reclaimed yet.” 

New Grande Cache coal mine located in area important for at-risk caribou, fish and grizzly bears

Mine 14’s lease is home to diverse species, including Canada lynx, wolverine, mountain goats and sheep, and at-risk fish and grizzly bears. Adjacent to the proposed mine is caribou habitat, a threatened species in Alberta, and protected under the federal Species At Risk Act.

“This is an area of steep slopes, sensitive and rich wildlife populations that already have been feeling the effects of all the industrial impacts in the area,” Carolyn Campbell, conservation director of the Alberta Wilderness Association, says. “It’s very concerning that there’s momentum for yet another coal mine.”

Mine 14 also straddles the boundary of two caribou management subregions in Alberta: the Upper Smoky and the Berland. The Alberta government committed to releasing plans for these areas to manage and limit the cumulative impacts on caribou, and other species, including grizzlies and at-risk fish, but one of these plans is now months overdue.

“This was one of the mines that was allowed to proceed when it seems like this should have been paused while those important overarching cumulative effects decisions were made,” Campbell says.

The company behind Mine 14 says the project will have a limited impact on the environment, citing its use of existing infrastructure like a coal processing plant and railways, its underground operations and its intention to recycle water and materials “where practical.”

She’s also concerned about the implications of coal wastewater given two recent incidents from CST Coal’s mine site near Grande Cache. In late 2022, approximately 107,000 litres of coal washwater was released from its containment area, followed by a second release in early March of 1.1 million litres into the Smoky River. Selenium affluent is highly toxic and has the potential to cause deformities and reproductive failures in fish. 

Valory Resources says the Mine 14 project doesn’t pose any risk for selenium leaching, as it’s an underground mine as opposed to an open-pit or surface mine, and “mine water will not be released into the natural drainage courses.”

A spokesperson for the Alberta Energy Regulator told The Narwhal they were unable to provide further details as to the cause of the spills, but added the regulator will “continue to ensure the company is meeting all public safety and environmental requirements to respond to the incidents.”

But environmental groups and concerned citizens, including Desrochers and the Saddle Club, are not convinced.

“We don’t know enough about what caused those releases,” Campbell says. “The Alberta Energy Regulator investigation is still going on. But these accidents and spills keep happening, and there’s not enough transparency about [the regulator’s] inspection and audit results.”

Grande Cache ‘pushing for long-term sustainable tourism industry’

Like any new mine, there is the potential for economic benefits. And the proponents of Mine 14 say the project has other benefits, too. Since the mine will produce metallurgical coal for steelmaking, the company bills it as “necessary to achieve Canada’s goals of making the clean energy transition and developing a new, green economy,” noting steel is necessary for clean energy infrastructure like wind turbines. 

But the future of coal in steelmaking is up for debate and local benefits of the mine remain unclear. The company has said the mine will bring 600 direct and indirect jobs to the community and provide money through royalty payments, taxes and other avenues.

The Grande Cache Chamber of Commerce couldn’t comment on the potential economic benefits of Mine 14. “The Chamber itself doesn’t really have much information about the mine,” Rick Bambrick, president of the Chamber of Commerce, says. 

“If and when they start up, they’re going to have a facility for 400 people to do the construction. We’re sort of waiting for the [municipal district] to announce that they’ve picked a place for these construction workers to operate from,” Bambrick says.

The idea of a worker’s camp has some residents, including Hall and Tippe of the Saddle Club, concerned. “There’s a possibility that they’re going to bring in transient workers from out of town, out of country, who will do their seven-day shifts, then go home,” Tippe says. In its submission to the federal government, the company behind Mine 14 says it will ensure “local suppliers, contractors and job-seekers are supported and prioritized,” but not everyone is convinced.

“With Mine 14, the [company] has no intention of bringing in long-term residents, or people that are going to buy homes,” Desrochers says. “Hotel owners will maybe see a little increased business at the beginning. But in the long term? No, it’s not going to be there.” 

He’s tired of the long-standing narrative of Grande Cache being a one-resource town that depends solely on coal production. “We have other industry here. We have a thriving forest. We have oil and gas. The community has been pushing for a long-term sustainable tourism industry,” Desrochers says. 

“Every time the mine north of us is closed, everybody thinks that the lights are going to turn off in Grande Cache. But people still live here, whether that mine is running or not.”

Updated on May 25, 2023, at 7:15 p.m. MT: This article was updated to remove a previous statment that Mine 14 has changed owners three times.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

On March 4, the Alberta government formally walked back its decision to open much of the eastern slopes of the Rockies to coal mining. 

Mostly. 

For now. 

The United Conservative Party government was under fire for months after it unilaterally announced in 2020 that it would rescind Alberta’s 1976 coal policy that all but prevented open-pit mines in the headwaters of the province. In February 2021, it reversed that initial move and formed a committee to examine the issue. 

The ensuing report, and its recommendations, were accepted by the government on March 4 and include a ban on new exploration or mine approvals, not only on the eastern slopes, but throughout the province, at least until new land-use plans are developed. 

Those opposed to new coal mines in Alberta are cautiously optimistic about the announcement, but concern remains. 

What is true for now is that no new coal projects will be moving forward in Alberta, on the eastern slopes and beyond. Energy Minister Sonya Savage said a ban on new mines would be extended from what’s known at Category 1 and 2 lands — mostly the Rockies and the eastern slopes — into Category 3 and 4 lands, which can cover land spanning out to the prairies. 

That expanded ban is new for the province and comes into effect under a ministerial order (more on that in a bit) and will remain in place until new land-use plans are developed. 

That’s what has changed. Here’s what has not changed since the government’s announcement.

1. Proposed Alberta coal mines like Tent Mountain can still move forward

There are a small handful of mines considered in the advanced stages that will be allowed to proceed through the regulatory process — proposals like Tent Mountain in the southwest corner of the Rockies and the Vista Mine expansion near Hinton.

The proposed Tent Mountain mine, located near the Crowsnest Pass in Alberta, would produce 4,925 tonnes of raw steel-making coal daily for 14 years. The Vista Mine, which produces coal to be burned for electricity, is seeking an expansion of what a mining website describes as “one of the largest undeveloped coal mines in North America.” (Another major proposal, Grassy Mountain, has already been rejected by both the province and the federal governments and recently lost an appeal of those decisions in court.)

Whether those projects are ultimately approved remains to be seen. 

“In the short run we’ve got certainty. In the longer run, I guess it depends on the outcome of the planning processes,” Nigel Bankes, professor emeritus of law at the University of Calgary, told The Narwhal. “And of course, it’s possible that the plans will simply exclude the possibility of any new coal mining, but they might also make provision for it.”

In the meantime, those proposals have the green light to continue through the approval process.

2. Existing Alberta coal mines can still operate in the eastern slopes of the Rockies

The moratorium on new mines does nothing to halt the operation of existing mines, like the Vista coal mine near Hinton, Alta. That mine, which produces thermal coal for export to South Korea, Japan and Taiwan, is located approximately 40 kilometers from Jasper National Park and has a mining footprint of nearly 1,500 hectares.

Despite facing major financial setbacks in recent years, the mine has undergone something of a recovery and has the capacity to ship roughly 6.5 million tonnes of coal west to Ridley Terminal on the B.C. coast annually, to be burned for electricity in other countries. Canada, meanwhile, has committed to phasing out coal-fired electricity.

3. Damage from the recent exploration boom is still visible on the landscape

In the months-long period between the Alberta government suddenly rescinding the 1976 coal policy and its decision to backtrack on that decision, there was something of a mini exploration boom on the eastern slopes. 

“We got a lot of surface damage last year, in terms of linear developments, pushing roads into some of these areas, and then just the test mining that they were doing,” Bankes said. 

“So, you know, we’ve lost that. And that’s the one major negative consequence of this flip flopping — of the removal of the policy, and then the gap until it was reinstated.”

He’s not sure that new damage will be cleaned up anytime soon, or at all. 

4. Questions remain about Indigenous consultation 

In its report, the coal committee stressed the need to involve Indigenous communities in any consultations on the future of coal developments in the province.

Latasha Calf Robe, with the grassroots collective Niitsítapi Water Protectors, said the emphasis on land-use planning and Indigenous consultation should lead to deeper engagement, not just a surface-level consultation process.

“There really does need to be a better commitment to a co-creative process, not just ‘hey, we’re going to consult, what do you think about this?’ ” she said.

“Having true co-created plans or strategies might help us move us in a really cool direction in terms of like, what is acceptable for those areas?”

5. Alberta still has a big cleanup problem on its hands

If those plans and consultations do point a way forward for coal developments in Alberta, they will also have to confront the issue of environmental liabilities and the means to remediate and reclaim disturbed landscapes. 

What’s already happened through exploration is indicative of the kind of damage that can occur when a mine is starting up and through to its closure. The coal committee recommended the government improve the way it collects funds to help with future clean up.

The province has a poor track record on funding liabilities, with billions of dollars in unfunded liabilities on the books, particularly when it comes to oil and gas cleanup. Alberta currently collects a security from mine operators for future cleanup costs, but the coal report highlighted concerns and the need for a review. 

“The auditor general of Alberta has indicated (in 2019) that there is a significant risk that asset values are overstated within the [Mine Financial Security Program],” the report noted. 

“The committee understands that, of 19 Alberta coal mines required to provide financial security in 2015, only two have been subjected to detailed audits by provincial officials.”

The report also raised concerns about a lack of funding for reclamation of old mine operations.

“It remains to be seen how they’re going to meaningfully address these issues,” Devon Earl, a conservation specialist with the Alberta Wilderness Association, told The Narwhal. “At least they’re acknowledging them, and we can only wait and see what they do with that moving forward.”

6. Alberta land-use planning remains stalled

A big focus of the government’s recent announcement is on land-use planning.

Alberta hasn’t been particularly motivated when it comes to creating and updating land-use plans — guiding documents that consider economic, social and environmental concerns when making decisions for regions of the province. 

Out of seven designated regions in the province, only two have plans — the Lower Athabasca regional plan implemented in 2012 and the South Saskatchewan regional plan implemented in 2014. 

Those plans take years to develop and involve considerable consultations — Bankes estimates each plan will take five or more years to develop.

Earl, with the Alberta Wilderness Association, said the plans are an effective tool for guiding decisions, as long they place limits on development based on science. 

“These plans should go through a really thorough cumulative effects assessment,” she said. “And they should find, based on our opinion, that impacts on water quality and water allocation, for example, strongly favour a total ban on mining.”

The government said in announcing its acceptance of the coal committee report that future development would be guided by regional, sub-regional and issue-specific plans. It’s unclear what’s meant by issue-specific plans in this context and the government has not responded to a request for clarification. 

“The government has sort of deferred responsibility onto these land use plans,” Earl said.

7. There is still no permanent ban on coal mining in Alberta’s eastern slopes

There are also lingering questions about the government’s commitment to maintaining the ban on new coal mines. 

The government could have introduced a bill to codify the ban on new coal activities on the eastern slopes, but it chose to enforce the decision through a ministerial order — a fast process, but one that can be undone just as quickly and without warning. 

Speaking in the legislature, NDP environment critic Marlin Schmidt said the ministerial order allows the government to reopen the Rockies to coal mining “with the stroke of a pen.”

Earl said she shares those concerns and would rather see policies enshrined in legislation. Bankes, meanwhile, is optimistic the government won’t revoke the changes anytime soon, and also thinks the decision was intentional. 

“I think they’ve done it this way because they’re trying to protect themselves against claims to compensation,” he said, adding Grassy Mountain has already been rejected by a federal review and that he believes the Vista expansion and Tent Mountain projects will be rejected through the regulatory process. 

“If [the government] were simply to say, you know, ‘these projects are going to die,’ then I think we’d be on the hook for compensation payments,” he said. 

In the end, it leaves the future of coal mining in Alberta right where it was when the 1976 coal policy was in place — a policy the government was able to overturn unilaterally and without notice. 

8. Advocates are still worried the UCP government is just waiting for public backlash to fade

Calf Robe, with Niitsítapi Water Protectors, said she’s cautiously optimistic about the report, but has concerns about the government’s intentions. 

“I think that this is the government’s way of prolonging this process in the hopes that ‘hey, maybe in 10 years, you know, First Nations might say yes or Albertans might change their minds,’ ” she said.

The coal policy committee’s report to the government suggested it was “too simplistic” to expect the world will move off coal due to calls for action to address the climate crisis. While developed countries are attempting to wean themselves off coal-fired electricity, the report said, countries like China and India have not taken the same track and continue “to support voracious appetites” for electricity and industrial development.

But the report also noted that global demand for coal was expected to plateau by 2025, based on projections by the International Energy Agency, and that this still allows opportunities for exporting coal produced in Alberta.

Bankes said it will be up to Albertans concerned about coal mining to get involved in the land-use planning process and to remain vigilant about the prospect of new mines. 

“I don’t think the fight is over,” he added. 

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Back in 2019, things were looking good for the Vista coal mine just outside Jasper National Park in Alberta. The mine had backing from a billionaire coal magnate in the U.S. and had just shipped its first train cars of coal west, to be burned for electricity in international markets. Two years later, though, the mine was shuttered and on the brink of financial ruin, with many of its supporters and local business partners facing millions in losses; and the charismatic billionaire behind the project, Chris Cline, had been killed in a helicopter crash off the coast of his private island in the Bahamas.

Now, there’s relief with the mine running and its owners paying back a portion of what is owed. The mine has clawed its way back from the brink of financial ruin, riding a wave of high prices to an estimated $152 million in cash on hand — a 96 per cent increase over what had been previously forecast — even while it avoided paying at least $1.1 million owed to local businesses, according to court documents. 

The resurrection of the mine was the result of creditor protection proceedings initiated after Coalspur, the U.S.-based owner, came up against several devastating financial and regulatory hurdles largely of its own creation and found itself unable to operate. 

The agreement that saved the mine was approved on Jan. 6 by 100 per cent of eligible creditors who voted on the plan at a virtual meeting. Several large creditors, including banking giant RBC and a trust set up for Chris Cline’s family, are set to receive all outstanding amounts, with the possibility of interest as part of the deal. Those owed less than $15,000 will also be paid back in full, while anyone over that threshold could opt to receive 75 per cent of their money, or get 50 per cent of what’s owed and gamble on the future price of coal with the promise of full payment in two years if coal prices stay high.

Only eight creditors, out of 161 who were eligible, opted to gamble. 

In total, Coalspur owed approximately $504 million to at least five secured creditors and investors, and $53.5 million to 286 unsecured creditors. 

Just over 60 of those creditors are in the small town of Hinton, where the mine is located. Almost 300 kilometres west of Edmonton, the town of just over 10,000 people has long relied on resources, including forestry, oil and gas and mining, but has seen a shift to tourism thanks to its position just outside Jasper National Park.

In Hinton alone, creditors were owed a total of $4.7 million. Nearly a quarter of that will never be recovered.

The Narwhal called 28 of the affected Hinton-area businesses owed over $15,000 and spoke with nine business owners. All said they continue to do business with Vista, one of the largest employers in town. 

Many local businesses affected by the creditor proceedings who spoke to The Narwhal said they’re relieved to get some money back and to see the mine back in business, even if there is lingering frustration. Most, but not all, took the view that getting something was far better than getting nothing and seeing the mine close for good. 

According to Anna Lund, an associate professor of law at the University of Alberta, there was not much the smaller creditors with outstanding amounts over $15,000 could do other than approve the plan, “because they don’t have information, because they don’t have very big claims and because they’re way down the priority payout.”

“They are pretty powerless,” she said.

Vista coal mine forced to shut down for four months in 2021

The Vista mine produces thermal coal, burned for electricity, for export to international markets like Japan, South Korea and Taiwan. Canada and Alberta have both vowed to phase out domestic use of thermal coal, with Alberta ahead of target and expected to have a coal-free electricity supply by 2023. Those goals do not currently affect thermal coal exports. 

Now, seemingly on more solid financial footing, the mine still faces challenges, including a shortage of investors interested in coal, a potential federal review of proposed expansions, a federal government that says it wants to stop exporting thermal coal and the ongoing roller coaster of global markets.

But the story of how the Vista mine found itself in dire financial straits goes beyond external forces and was laid out in court documents. 

The mine’s troubles started shortly after it opened in 2019 and realized its planned filtration system for waste tailings would not work and it lacked sufficient capacity to store the byproducts. Receiving regulatory approval for more tailings pond capacity through the Alberta Energy Regulator was slower than the waste built up and the mine was forced to temporarily shut down on Feb. 1, 2021.

It remained closed for four months. 

That coincided with high coal prices on the global market, which the company had bet against as part of a hedge with its distributor, Trafigura. The distributor called in the money it was owed on that bet — US$59.9 million, just as the mine struggled with stopped production.

In lieu of payment, which Coalspur could not afford, Trafigura seized the mine’s coal and sold it, leaving Coalspur with no ability to fund its operations and, by its own admission in court documents, an inability to attract financing in a world moving away from coal-fired electricity. It entered creditor protection in April 2021.

Creditor protection proceedings are initiated when a company can no longer cover its financial obligations and seeks time to either restructure and renegotiate those obligations or to liquidate its assets. 

Coalspur’s fight against a federal environmental assessment

Coalspur has long been seeking to expand its mining operations near Hinton — an increase that would expand the mine’s output by six million tonnes per year and which Coalspur said would “approximately double annual expenditures, taxes, royalties and other government payments”— but has been stalled by the federal government’s decision to designate the project for an environmental review. The company has since been arguing with the federal government in court, a process which has been made even more complicated by challenges by the Ermineskin First Nation, which had supported the project for its economic benefits and had argued it was not adequately consulted by the federal government. 

Amid court challenges, the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada says work continues to evaluate the project expansion to see if it merits a full review.

“Our position is that [the review] is more than lawful,” Fraser Thomson, a lawyer with Ecojustice who has been arguing for an environmental review in court, told The Narwhal. “It’s a valid exercise of the minister’s discretion.”

“This is a massive proposed expansion of a thermal coal mine — a commodity we know that does massive damage, both to the local environment and to the global environment,” he said. 

That damage includes numerous human health concerns where the coal is ultimately burned, including respiratory ailments, cancer and cardiac arrest, among others issues. According to the Pembina Institute, phasing out coal-fired power by 2030 will mean 1,008 fewer premature deaths in Canada between 2015 and 2035 — the vast majority of which are attributed to the Prairies. Then there are the climate implications.

Thomson said an expansion to the mine could make it the largest thermal coal mine in Canadian history, producing 15 million tonnes per year. 

Burning that much coal, according to Thomson, produces 33 million tonnes of carbon. “That’s the same as seven million cars on the road. So it’s a huge amount of carbon dioxide,” he said. ”From a climate perspective, it’s a non-starter.”

Thomson argued none of this should come as a surprise, noting that the Vista mine opened four years after the Paris climate agreement was signed in 2015.

“We’ve known for decades that the climate crisis is upon us; that we need to reduce our fossil fuel consumption. It’s hard to see how opening a thermal coal mine in 2019 is a good business decision.”

That’s little comfort for those small businesses in Hinton dependent on the mine’s economic impact. 

Hinton businesses in ‘tough position’: bankruptcy expert

When it initiated creditor protection proceedings, Coalspur owed nearly $5 million to local businesses, ranging from car dealerships to oilfield services to welding shops.

In the end, most will not be paid back what they’re owed in full.

Of the more than two dozen businesses The Narwhal contacted, there was frustration, but mostly relief.  Some blamed governments for the mine’s woes, others the mine ownership, but the vast majority were happy to see the mine up and running again.

“I’m actually happy with the way things played out,” Trina Radley, co-owner of Lynx Creek Oilfield Services in Hinton, told The Narwhal. “We’ve been in several situations over the last two years where companies have gone bankrupt and you get nothing.”

Radley, the only business owner willing to speak on the record, said her company was luckier than others, both because it is well established and because it wasn’t owed larger sums. Lynx Creek was owed $22,588.

Facing the prospect of receiving no compensation is a big stick in creditor proceedings in Canada, and one that leaves local contractors “pretty powerless” compared to the big creditors, according to Lund, the bankruptcy expert.

“The small companies are also in a tough position because they have the amounts outstanding that they’re owed, but a lot of them also have what you might think of as a financial interest other than as a creditor: they want to keep doing business with the company as it goes forward,” she said. 

Then there are the larger economic benefits local businesses are considering: housing prices, municipal taxes and hundreds of jobs and the spinoffs from that employment.

She said small creditors don’t have the time or expertise to properly examine their options, whereas big creditors have often been at the table from the beginning and know how the system works. Many, including banks, are at the table when legislation is reviewed or new precedents set. 

The local chamber of commerce, which was owed $1,255, was unavailable for comment. 

The Mayor of Hinton, Marcel Michaels, told The Narwhal the town could survive the closure of the mine despite the fact it is “invaluable” to the community, but the impact on individuals would be immense. 

“There’s no medium or long-term plan, let alone a short-term plan, in order to transition a lot of these workers,” he said. 

“I think many people agree coal has an expiry date. But unfortunately, the expiry date is not 2022.”

The other option: ‘a liquidation scenario’

The prospect of the mine closing with little compensation to unsecured creditors and taking its hundreds of jobs with it was front and centre in the proceedings. 

“The [plan] will result in considerably greater recoveries for all affected creditors than would be achieved in a liquidation scenario, wherein there is no certainty that general unsecured creditors would receive any recoveries at all,” reads a court document submitted in January, after the vote had been cast. 

It was just the latest in a string of documents that stressed the benefits for small creditors throughout the process. 

In the final affidavit submitted by Coalspur’s president and CEO Michael Beyer, an American living in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, he said emerging from the proceedings intact was a better outcome for all creditors, as opposed to a fire sale of assets, and will enable relationships into the future. 

In an earlier affidavit, he said if expansions of the mine move ahead, the company estimates an additional 370 full-time jobs would be created, and claims over 1,000 full and part-time jobs would be created from economic spinoffs. Those additional jobs are calculated based on a framework designed by the Canadian Coal Association, according to Beyer’s statement.

Beyer did not respond to interview requests submitted through his lawyers or by email to an address listed in court documents. 

Coalspur also did not respond to a request left at its Hinton office. 

Business owners who spoke with The Narwhal talked about their desire to see the mine continue and the impact its closure would have on the town and its economy, on the value of their homes and the security of their neighbours. 

They also cited their need for that work, and the stigma that might come from speaking out as reasons for not wanting to talk on the record. 

Some said they felt they had no choice in approving the plan.

One owner who said they were feeling “neutral and with relief” after the agreement was approved, said the creditor process was handled well, but it was still a challenge. 

“It was a difficult year, put it that way,” they said.

“The timing was terrible, going into summer, probably for a lot of businesses where you actually hire extra staff. And yet, you were down all this money. You know, so you’re just basically carrying the money for quite a lot longer than you would normally.”

That owner said the company seemed serious about keeping the mine open and working with the community, but also acknowledged there are bigger forces at play. 

“I have no idea about where the political angle comes in,” they said.

Those politics extend well beyond the borders of Hinton, of Alberta and even Canada. 

Thermal coal markets and politics

Clark Williams-Derry, an energy finance analyst at the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis, said international thermal coal markets, where the vast majority of Vista’s resources are sold, is currently over US$200 per tonne, significantly higher than the US$80 per tonne it has averaged over the past five years. 

But he cautioned those markets are volatile and the current rate is due in large part to political moves in China where the government is cracking down on its coal industry and driving up prices. Those spikes then affect international markets. 

“It’s really China, and to some extent India, that winds up being sort of the thing that makes those markets swing,” he said.

Beyond the international markets, he pointed to recent statements from the Liberal government in Ottawa which says it wants to phase out exports of thermal coal by 2030.

He said the federal government and its policies are now a major risk factor for the future of the industry.

“I get that people’s livelihood is on the line here and I feel like clenched up inside when I think about families that are depending on this, but it’s not in their control,” Williams-Derry said. 

“Leave aside what’s happening in Ottawa. If you look at what’s happening in China, in Beijing, there is no guarantee of an income here. There’s no guarantee of financial success. You’re rolling the dice, and the dice are loaded against you.”

Mayor Michaels, however, is confident in the mine staying open for the foreseeable future. 

“There’s some, I think, uncertainty on their part, but the investments, I think, outweighs the risk of them just walking away immediately,” he said. 

“Now, will things pivot and change, potentially, for them in the next 24 to 36 months? If we continuously get uncertainty from the federal government on thermal coal in our area, perhaps. But again, I feel confident with them continuing to try to, you know, get a return on their initial investment, which was hefty.”

Updated Feb. 14, 2022, at 3:35 p.m. MT: This story was updated to clarify that Fraser Thomson said the mine’s financial troubles were not surprising since it opened four years after the 2015 Paris Climate Agreement. He did not specify whether anyone in the community should or should not be surprised.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.