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. 

A valley in Kananaskis Country in southwestern Alberta, on the eastern edge of the Rockies, is threatened by West Fraser Timber’s plans to log the area. Activists are concerned the permitted logging will change the hydrology of the Highwood River, which runs alongside Highway 40 and provides habitat for threatened bull trout.

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. 

Defenders of the Eastern Slopes operated a camp in Kananaskis Country through the fall, and while the camp has since been shut down, protesters continue to oppose logging in the area.

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. 

Michael Sawyer, one of the Kananaskis organizers, says a more direct approach is needed to protesting environmental destruction in Alberta. He has fought for years through more official channels, but believes part of his work now is ”creating a culture of civil disobedience.”

“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.”

The forest in Kananaskis Country is a diverse ecosystem populated by many different plants and animals. It’s also a popular destination for wilderness lovers drawn to the Rockies and their majestic beauty.

“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. 

Kananaskis Country is a protected area that includes parkland, recreational spaces and industrial activity. The area in question has been earmarked for logging since before the area was even created.

Tourists’ cars line these Rocky Mountain roads. Soon logging trucks will haul the trees away

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.

Logging bridges across the rivers and creeks of the Highwood Pass valley would threaten sensitive habitat for bull trout, a species native to the area.

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. 

The group of organizers is also concerned about the possibility of new coal mines opening south of Kananaskis, which, like the impacts from logging, could disrupt the water reserves in the area. The eastern slopes of the Rocky Mountains are the headwaters for all of the creeks and rivers that run through southern Alberta and provide important water reservoirs in times of drought.

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.

Michael Sawyer, who lives in Nanton. Alta., is concerned about the impact logging and mining could have on the area.

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. Now, we’re in the middle of our trial.

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.  

Mike Judd, one of the camp organizers, helped set up the logging blockade at Kananaskis this fall. He believes the Alberta government sees the vital resources of the Rockies’ eastern slopes as a ”warehouse of treasures that keep the Alberta economy rolling.“

“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.”

Finn Rosenegger, 15, one of the blockaders, climbs a wooden gate activists built along the logging road.

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. 

Supporters came together in the fall to make art for the barrier along the logging road and to share resources and dialogue around civil disobedience.

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.”

Supporters gather in a tent at the logging camp. Organizers hope the movement can provide an opportunity for community members to connect with each other.

Colin Smith helped organize weekend workshops to introduce people to the cause. ”This hopefully can be a catalyst to future actions,” he said.

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. 

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

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.

A view of Kananaskis Country near Longview, Alta., in November.

“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.

Government scientist Colin Cooke’s research has implications for B.C., where metallurgical coal mining is both big business and the subject of an international inquiry over extensive water pollution flowing through the Elk Valley and downstream into Montana and Idaho. Photo: Callum Gunn

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.

Bill Donahue, a scientist and former head of environmental monitoring for the Alberta government, raised concerns about the muzzling of government scientist when submission of the paper he co-authored with Colin Cooke was delayed by senior officials. Photo: Shane Gross / The Narwhal

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.

The Alberta government has faced a backlash from ranchers and others opposed to the prospect of a renewed coal mining industry in the eastern slopes of the Rockies, in part, over the threat of water contamination. Photo: Leah Hennel / The Narwhal

“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.

Katie Morrison, executive director of the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society’s southern Alberta chapter, said it’s important to have research on the impacts of coal mining on water quality available as part of the public discourse. Photo: Supplied by Katie Morrison

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.”

Open-pit coal mining can increase levels of selenium in rivers, which can be toxic to fish populations and contaminate drinking water. Photo: Leah Hennel / The Narwhal

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.

Get the inside scoop on The Narwhal’s environment and climate reporting by signing up for our free newsletter.

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. 

Just across the border from Alberta, B.C. has allowed coal mining on its mountains for decades. Alberta largely barred mines from its eastern slopes, but consecutive United Conservative governments have tried to bring coal back in the southern part of the province. Now, farther north, a thermal coal mine that was not impacted by past restrictions is set to expand. Photo: Callum Gunn

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. 

The inside story of an Alberta coal mine devastated by a financial crisis

“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. 

This Alberta coal mine is back from the brink of financial ruin — but it comes at a cost

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. 

The Rocky Mountains hug the western border of Alberta and are the source of water for almost the entire province and beyond. The area is a weave of forests and peaks, some protected and others open to development. Just outside Japser National Park, the Vista coal mine plans to expand its operations and its operating life. Photo: Gavin John / The Narwhal

“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.

Get the inside scoop on The Narwhal’s environment and climate reporting by signing up for our free newsletter.

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. 

Pipeline expansion is back in the news, with Alberta Premier Danielle Smith pushing for more market access, not less, for oil and gas. The effort comes as U.S. President Donald Trump threatens Canada with tariffs, leaving premiers and the federal government scrambling to find solutions. Photo: Jesse Winter / The Narwhal

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. 

Ranchers came out strong against coal mining on the eastern slopes when the previous United Conservative government under Jason Kenney pushed for its return. The Danielle Smith government is once again lifting restrictions on mines in the region, which is already stirring opposition. Photo: Leah Hennel / The Narwhal

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.”

Alberta quietly opens cougar hunting in provincial park

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.

Coal mining, like this project in Grande Cache, is one of the industrial activities ongoing in Alberta’s eastern slopes, now off-limits to new wind energy projects. Four other new coal mine proposals have permission to move ahead from the Alberta government, despite a ban on coal mining in the Rocky Mountain region. Photo: Darrel Comeau / The Narwhal

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. 

A draft map of areas in Alberta where the government plans to curtail renewable power developments. A long buffer zone following the edge of the Rocky Mountains will be off-limits to wind farms, while other zones shaded in blue will be subject to what the government calls “visual impact assessments.” The latter zones will apply to all power projects but the buffer zones prohibit only new wind energy projects. Map: Government of Alberta

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. 

Work is underway on The Gateway, an already approved commercial development owned by Three Sisters Mountain Village, on the edge of what will be a sprawling residential and commercial development that has been a source of anger and opposition in Canmore, Alta. Photo: Drew Anderson / The Narwhal

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.”

Riverstone, a new suburb on Calgary’s southern edge, sits across a freeway from the soon-to-be-developed Logan Landing, now home to wetlands and a healthy population of birds. Calgary has a tendency to sprawl, though wind farms are no longer permitted in a buffer zone that extends from the Rocky Mountains to the city’s edge. Photo: Drew Anderson / The Narwhal

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.

Sections of cleared forest alongside the Highwood River in Kananaskis. Forestry companies continue to seek approval for new cutblocks. Photo: Gavin John / The Narwhal

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.

Logging continues in the buffer zone along the eastern slopes of the Rocky Mountains. In March, the Alberta government celebrated a new pulp mill to be built in Hinton, also located in the region prohibiting all new wind farms. Photos: Gavin John / The Narwhal

“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. 

Several coal mines are currently in operation in Alberta, including CST Coal in Grande Cache. In 2021, the Alberta government also announced four more proposed coal mines could continue to advance their applications, including another coal mine in the same community. Photos: Darrel Comeau / The Narwhal

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.

CST Coal Inc. opened in Grande Cache in 1969 and has been hit hard by the volatile boom-and-bust nature of the coal industry, leaving some locals wary of staking their future on another coal mine. Photo: Darrel Comeau / The Narwhal

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 Utilities Commission concluded any prohibition to “achieve viewscape protection” should “apply to all forms of development within the restricted zone.” No new rules have been put in place to limit the oil and gas industry in regions now off-limits to new wind energy projects. Photo: Amber Bracken / The Narwhal

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 severe Alberta drought looms, fracking consumes huge volumes of water — forever 

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.

Locals near Grande Cache worry a new coal mine will impact a burgeoning ecotourism industry, including Jules Desrochers’ camping and horseback-riding business, located downstream of the planned mine.

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. 

“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.”

Jules Desrochers

“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. 

The proposed coal mine will be located on Grande Mountain, pictured here, not far from the headwaters of the Smoky River.

“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 area around the Mine 14 coal project is habitat for grizzly bears, bighorn sheep and caribou.

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.”

Grande Mountain, where Valory Resources wants to build a new coal mine, is visible from Grande Cache and is popular with hikers. The Alberta government stopped new coal projects on the eastern slopes in 2022 but made an exemption for Mine 14 because it was in “advanced” planning stages.

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.

Grande Cache was purpose-built for coal and already has a functioning coal processing plant, located on the banks of the Smoky River. Coal from Mine 14 would primarily be shipped to Asia for use in steelmaking.

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.”

CST Coal Inc. opened in Grande Cache in 1969 and has been hit hard by the volatile boom-and-bust nature of the coal industry, leaving some locals wary of staking their future on another coal mine.

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.

Jules Desrochers’ camping and horseback-riding business is one of several ecotourism ventures that will be impacted by the mine, which would be located upstream. Residents say they haven’t had adequate opportunities to provide feedback about the plan.

“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.”

Aseniwuche Winewak Nation is concerned about coal dust. Last summer, the Nation filed a petition for a federal review of the Mine 14 proposal, citing health concerns, water contamination, potential effects on fish and species at risk and disruption of land-based, traditional practices of Indigenous Peoples. It was rejected.

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.”

Valory Resources says Mine 14 won’t leak selenium into waterways, but residents remain concerned about the risks of having a mine upstream.

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.

Proponents of Mine 14 say the coal project will bring jobs to the region, but business owners like Desrochers are concerned those jobs won’t benefit the community in the long term.

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.” 

Desrochers says Grande Cache has been “pushing for a long-term sustainable tourism industry” — and he worries that isn’t compatible with another coal mine.

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.

This Alberta coal mine is back from the brink of financial ruin — but it comes at a cost

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. 

On a flight over the areas affected by coal exploration, it’s clear that a variety of industries are active in the region. These impacts have led advocates to call for landscape-level planning that takes into account for cumulative effects of industry and other activities. Photo: Amber Bracken / The Narwhal

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. 

A bird’s eye view of coal leases on the eastern slopes of Alberta’s Rockies

“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.

Alberta Energy Minister Sonya Savage announced a new approach to coal mining across the province, but advocates remain skeptical whether the moratorium on new mines will be permanent. Photo: Government of Alberta / ​​Flickr

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.

Coalspur’s Vista mine just outside Jasper National Park in Alberta ships thermal coal by rail to be shipped to international markets like South Korea, Japan and Taiwan, where it will be burned for electricity. Though Canada is phasing out domestic burning of coal for electricity, these plans do not currently include phasing out the mining of thermal coal to be burned elsewhere. Map: Alicia Carvalho / The Narwhal

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 inside story of an Alberta coal mine devastated by a financial crisis

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. 

Coalspur’s plans to expand were designated for a federal environmental review by then-Environment and Climate Change Minister Jonathan Wilkinson, though the process has been caught up in legal challenges. Photo: Province of British Columbia / Flickr

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.

The Vista coal mine is located just 40 kilometres from Jasper National Park, and employs hundreds of workers near the community of Hinton, Alta. The mine was forced into a months-long closure last year as it failed to obtain necessary permits to expand its tailings ponds. Photo: Shutterstock

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. 

A bird’s eye view of coal leases on the eastern slopes of Alberta’s Rockies

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.

The Alberta government should not allow any new coal mines around the North Saskatchewan River, Edmonton’s only source of drinking water, until it completes a “scientifically rigorous” review of all the risks, says the city’s water utility company in a new report.

Beginning in the Columbia Icefields in Banff National Park, the river is not only Edmonton’s only source of drinking water, but it is also a vital wildlife corridor.

The report, which is based on a risk assessment conducted by the city’s water utility EPCOR, notes that coal mines are known to affect water quality and contribute to climate change both through deforestation and greenhouse gas emissions from the mines themselves.

On Friday, city councillors on Edmonton’s utility committee unanimously recommended to city council that the mayor write a letter to the provincial government underscoring the potentially “serious impact of coal mining on our regional watershed and ecosystems.”

The municipal committee also recommended that council direct the city manager and EPCOR to make a submission to a provincial coal policy committee based on the report, and direct the city administration to report back on both the status of the North Saskatchewan River Regional Plan and the need for a “formal watershed management plan.”

Understanding the combined impact of multiple mines is crucial because each new project mine could increase contaminant and sediment levels in the waterway “with dire consequences for the animals that live in the river,” said Greg Goss, a professor of biological sciences at the University of Alberta and a new member of the North Saskatchewan Watershed Alliance.

He agrees watershed scale modelling is needed to fully understand the combined impact of any new mines on water quality and how that may affect aquatic species, he said, particularly given climate models that project increased rainfall in the headwaters, which could in turn increase the risk of contaminants leaching from mine waste rock.

The new report from Edmonton’s water utility notes that while the risk to the city’s drinking water is low, the rare mine failure would still have devastating effects. Photo: Amber Bracken / The Canadian Press / The Narwhal

The EPCOR report concludes the risk to Edmonton’s drinking water is low and the risks to aquatic ecosystem health within the city are medium-low if potential future coal mines follow existing regulatory requirements.

However, despite existing rules, “coal mining can have both long term and short term environmental impacts,” it says.

“In the event of a rare catastrophic mine failure (such as a tailings dam failure), there would be an extreme impact on downstream water quality,” the report says.

Christopher Smith, parks coordinator with the northern Alberta chapter of the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society, described this as a “non-negligible risk” for Edmonton.

“If that were to happen it could severely impact the City of Edmonton’s capacity to provide water for Edmontonians,” Smith said. 

EPCOR’s assessment itself notes two relatively recent tailings dam failures — one at the Obed Mountain coal mine in Hinton, Alta. in 2013 and another at the Mount Polley gold and copper mine near Quesnel, B.C. in 2014 — that contaminated water with mine waste. 

Report follows months-long battle over coal policy

Edmonton City Council asked city staff and EPCOR in February to report back on the risks of possible future coal mining and tools the municipality could use to protect the headwaters of the North Saskatchewan River.

The directive followed a number of tense months in Alberta starting in the spring of 2020 when Jason Kenney’s United Conservative Party government rescinded the 1976 Coal Policy that, among other things, restricted coal exploration and development on Category 2 lands along the eastern slopes of the Rockies and foot, which included the headwaters of the North Saskatchewan River.

In the wake of considerable public backlash, the province reinstated the policy in early February and announced it would consult before developing “a new, modern coal policy.” Public consultations are underway now and a final report from the provincial coal policy committee is due on November 15.

Precautionary approach urged to avoid decades long pollution challenges

While the report to Edmonton’s Utility Committee notes that any future mines will be subject to environmental assessment, these are conducted on a project-by-project basis.  

Coal mines are associated with numerous pollutants such as aluminum, nitrate, cadmium and arsenic, the report notes. Selenium, which leaches from coal mine waste rock and is toxic to aquatic life at elevated levels, is a particular concern.

A bird’s eye view of coal leases on the eastern slopes of Alberta’s Rockies

Just across the provincial border, B.C.’s Elk Valley has battled selenium pollution from coal mines for decades and with several new mines proposed in that area, experts fear the problem will continue to get worse.

It’s a particular concern for west slope cutthroat trout, listed as a threatened species under the Species at Risk Act. 

“The population is likely doomed,” according to a recent report by the University of Victoria Environmental Law Centre urging Canada’s Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development to launch an inquiry into Elk Valley mine pollution.

The debates around pollution concerns that are playing out in Alberta right now have parallels across the border in B.C.’s Elk Valley, where coal mines have caused selenium pollution for decades. Photo: Callum Gunn

The City of Edmonton report notes that with five per cent of the North Saskatchewan watershed already covered by coal leases there is a risk to source water and aquatic life from selenium pollution should development proceed.

EPCOR recommends that a “precautionary approach” be taken in any assessment of potential coal mining.

“Despite advances in treatment technologies, exposing rock rich in selenium and other metals has been shown to affect water quality for decades in downstream water bodies,” the report notes.

“Mitigation and remediation is cost prohibitive and difficult.”

Robin Campbell, the president of the Coal Association of Canada, an industry lobby group, said in a statement to The Narwhal that companies employ “multiple lines of defence” against selenium contamination. He said modern mines minimize the use of water through water recycling and take a “rigorous approach” to protecting surface water.

Edmonton urged to be a ‘zealous advocate’

The report from municipal staff recommends the city submit a technical report based on its findings to the provincial Coal Policy Committee and report back on the need for a watershed management plan.

While Smith said he appreciates the work that went into the report, ultimately the issue requires a broader lens.

“It comes down to the general ecological integrity of the river and as a wildlife corridor and that extends beyond municipal boundaries,” he said, noting that the area where mining would take place is a significant recreation area for many Edmonton residents.

While decisions around the future of mining may not fall within the City of Edmonton’s purview, Smith said “they can absolutely act as a zealous advocate on the provincial stage.”

“It’s one of the biggest metropolitan areas in Alberta, and they do have sway,” he said.

In response to The Narwhal’s interview request, a spokesperson for Edmonton Mayor Don Iveson said the mayor would wait to comment until the report is brought before city council.

Updated Aug. 27, 2021, at 10:32 a.m. PT: New information added about city councillors response to the reports and recommendations.

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.

Dickson Wood is sitting on his back deck listening to a pair of nesting redwing blackbirds chatter in the nearby reeds. He’s pretty sure there are babies in the nest. “They get a little bit more aggressive when the eggs start to hatch,” he says with a chuckle.

It’s peaceful scenes like this one that are reminiscent of his younger days spent exploring the eastern slopes of the Rocky Mountains in and around Clearwater County, west of Red Deer, Alta.

Sixty years ago, when he first started coming to his family’s cottage, the region was what he described as “wilderness territory” — an area with boundless opportunities to hike, fish and camp.

“Over the years I’ve seen it evolve, frankly sadly,” he tells The Narwhal.

Forestry, oil and gas activity and coal exploration have turned much of the region from what Wood describes as a “pristine” forested area to one chopped up by seismic lines, cutblocks, well pads and boreholes.

Swaths of trees are removed in the area of the Ram River Coal Corporation’s Aries project in Clearwater County, with forestry cutblocks stretching to the horizon. Photo: Amber Bracken / The Narwhal / The Canadian Press

On a recent helicopter flight over Clearwater County, The Narwhal got a bird’s eye view of the area, which includes exploration for the Ram River Coal Corporation’s Aries Mine and Valory Resources’ Blackstone project.

Projects like these had many Albertans up in arms over the last year, after the United Conservative Party government announced in May 2020 it had rescinded the longstanding coal policy which prohibited most coal mining in areas like these (known in the policy as category 2 lands).

Alberta’s coal policy — in place since 1976 — allowed for exploration, but getting approval to build an actual coal mine was much more arduous. That changed when the coal policy was rescinded, sparking backlash: ranchers upset over deteriorated water quality, tourism operators concerned about destruction of remaining wilderness and concern over what Wood described as “disingenuous” communication of its plans.

The government dialled back its efforts to open up the eastern slopes to open-pit coal mining, and also eventually paused exploration.

“We admit we didn’t get this one right,” Energy Minister Sonya Savage said at a press conference in February announcing the government’s course-reversal.

How a public uprising caused a province built on fossil fuels to reverse course on coal mining

But residents and advocates are concerned that many Albertans may view the issue as settled, and for those The Narwhal spoke to, the eastern slopes are far from free of future threats from coal mining.

“Everyone’s let their guard down,” Travis Boschman, a wildlife photographer in Red Deer, told The Narwhal. “I’m happy that [exploration] is stopped for now but I don’t have a lot of faith that it’s going to stop forever.”

This leaves some advocating for not just a reprieve from industrial activity, but a conscious effort to protect the region from the cumulative impacts of numerous industries.

“There are certain areas where it’s a non-starter and the eastern slopes just has to be one of those,” Wood said.

Coal exploration quietly chugged along in recent years

Clearwater County was blanketed in coal leases following the government’s announcement that it would rescind the coal policy.

Coal leases soon covered nearly 10 per cent of the county’s area, according to data from the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society. The area of coal leases more than quadrupled after the government’s announcement that the coal policy would be rescinded, according to the group. Then, facing pressure, the government paused the sale of new leases in category 2 lands in January.

That didn’t stop companies holding existing leases from pursuing exploration, though not all coal leases had active exploration activity.

Then, facing more backlash, the government announced another pause in April on all existing and new exploration on Category 2 lands. At the time, Energy Minister Sonya Savage directed the Alberta Energy Regulator to pause all approvals for coal exploration programs until December 2021. (Tonya Zelinsky, a spokesperson for the Alberta Energy Regulator, told The Narwhal by email that “beyond that date, regular processes would resume unless otherwise directed by the Government of Alberta.”)

But coal exploration in the area had quietly proceeded before the pause, with roots many decades in the past.

The Ram River Coal Corporation and Valory Resources have both been slowly working on potential coal projects in Clearwater County, where coal exploration has been taking place for years. Map: Alicia Carvalho / The Narwhal

The Blackstone project, near the Clearwater River, saw early exploration dating back to the 1970s, and was first mapped by the Geologic Survey of Canada in 1945, according to a 2020 investor presentation from the company.

By 2020, the company had drilled 110 boreholes, drilling a total distance of 17,600 metres. In its 2020 investor presentation, the company noted it had plans to further its exploration program by adding another 20,000 metres of drilling, as well as 100 kilometres of seismic lines.

Boreholes, also known as drill holes, are drilled to assess a coal resource, and though they often represent a small footprint on land — some are 15 centimetres in diameter — they can reach down hundreds of metres below the earth’s surface.

To drill a borehole, companies must transport a drilling rig, often mounted on a skid, through the forest to the proposed site, resulting in visible disturbances on the landscape in the form of removed trees and, oftentimes, new access roads.

To the north, the Aries Ram River coal project has also been drilling bore holes for decades. Between 1970 and 2013, 608 drill holes were completed, for a total drilling distance of more than 63,000 metres, according to a 2017 technical report completed for the company.

Representatives of Ram Coal and Valory Resources did not respond to The Narwhal’s request for an interview.

All this activity has chugged along relatively quietly, leading advocates to wonder what the landscape looked like as a result.

A bird’s eye view

Fields of dandelions bowed their heads in the wind as a helicopter alighted on a recent flight over the coal exploration area for Ram Coal and Valory Resources.

The flight was arranged by the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society to take its own videographers as well as three journalists up for a birds-eye view of coal exploration activity.

Snowy peaks lined the horizon as the flight departed from Calgary in early June, and a landscape dominated by agriculture shifted quickly to forests as the helicopter headed north toward the Blackstone coal project.

The flight path included the Clearwater, North Saskatchewan and Ram Rivers. One of the concerns highlighted by the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society is the proximity of some coal exploration to these rivers, which form an important part of Alberta’s network of drinking water tributaries.

Hovering above the Blackstone project area, the view from the helicopter changes. Hillsides appear shaved, the forest removed in chunks. Roads twist back and forth along the sides of cleared valleys.

There are countless trees pushed up in piles, dotting the slopes like hay stacks in a farmer’s field.

But looking down at the pockmarked landscape, it’s clear that it’s not just coal exploration that has been taking place in the area.

Outlines of drill pads, pipelines, compressor stations, seismic lines and cutblocks are all visible from the air throughout the flight.

“It’s hard to tell where one industry ends and another begins,” Mark, the pilot, remarks as the helicopter makes its trip back to the airport.

Cumulative impacts highlight the need for land use planning: advocates

The long list of industries active on the eastern slopes has long been a concern for residents and conservation advocates.

“The environment doesn’t operate on the basis of single projects; it’s the cumulative impacts that are a concern,” Wood said.

Recognition of the cumulative impacts of industrial activity in a region has slowly been gaining traction in Alberta, and the province has gradually been introducing what it calls regional plans. (The Alberta government did not respond to The Narwhal’s request for an interview about regional planning.)

The province is divided into seven regions, two of which — the South Saskatchewan and the Lower Athabasca — have seen the implementation of completed regional plans, which are legally binding documents that replace older versions from the 1980s, according to Christopher Smith, parks coordinator with the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society.

Updated regional plans, he said, attempt “to manage land more on a holistic level and on a landscape level, in order to address cumulative effects.”

Forestry cutblocks and pipe yards are visible from a flight above Clearwater County. Advocates say the myriad industrial, agricultural and recreational uses of the region highlight the need for landscape level planning that takes into account cumulative impacts. Photos: Amber Bracken / The Narwhal / The Canadian Press

The South Saskatchewan regional plan, for example, “uses a cumulative effects management approach to balance economic development opportunities and social and environmental considerations.”

Without a master document like a regional plan, Smith said, “there’s just too many layers for any one particular ministry to be able to fully address within their portfolio.”

But regional planning has stalled in recent years.

“Land-use planning at the landscape level has been a tough sell in Alberta for decades,” Ian Urquhart, the executive director of the Alberta Wilderness Association, told The Narwhal. “Serious cumulative effects management always has been a dream — or an illusion — when it comes to managing lands and natural resources in Alberta.”

Consultation for a North Saskatchewan regional plan, which includes the Aries and Blackstone project areas, began in 2014 but a plan has not yet been completed. “Snails progress at faster paces than regional development in Alberta,” Urquhart said. “This government doesn’t, in my opinion, want anything to do with serious consideration of cumulative effects.”

Without a regional plan, critics fear cumulative impacts won’t properly be addressed.

“No one ministry can deal with the cumulative effects if there’s impacts being felt from other activities outside of their jurisdiction.”

Chris Smith, the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society

“The government can’t keep dragging their feet on this regional planning, because in the meantime, we’re creating patchwork policies that are trying to plug the gaps,” Smith said.

“That’s what the regional planning was meant to address — these reactive piecemeal plans to address issues as they cropped up.” Instead, he said, these issues could be addressed by the frameworks created by a regional plan: data could be gathered, baselines established and big-picture impacts better accounted for.

“What it was really meant to do was to bring all these siloed ministries together to deal with these problems holistically,” he said. “No one ministry can deal with the cumulative effects if there’s impacts being felt from other activities outside of their jurisdiction.”

In neighbouring B.C. the Blueberry River First Nations just won a precedent-setting decision that marks the first cumulative impacts Aboriginal Rights case in Canada. In her ruling, B.C. Supreme Court Justice Emily Burke wrote “the province’s mechanisms for assessing and taking into account cumulative effects are lacking and have contributed to the breach of its obligations under Treaty 8.”

Blueberry River First Nations win precedent-setting Treaty Rights case

Minister putting ‘cart before the horse’: advocate

Speaking at a news conference in April, Savage made it clear that the province’s efforts to update the coal policy were going to happen before any broader, landscape-level planning.

“These consultations are about coal policy, it’s not about the broader land-use planning initiatives,” she said. “It’s about coal. … Let’s get the coal policy and vision done first.”

That leaves advocates concerned about whether the whole picture of industrial activity has been fully considered.

“The Minister is putting the cart before the horse here,” Urquhart told The Narwhal. “You want land-use planning: you want to have an idea of where you think coal fits in on the land, if it fits in at all.”

“You don’t go ahead and look at developing a coal policy before you’ve made those basic land use decisions.”

Urquhart and others are concerned the UCP government has prioritized industrial development, including coal, over other priorities.

“This government has operated in a way that just wants to open the door for industrial use of the land,” he said. “Any serious consideration of cumulative effects just doesn’t just work in that sort of world.”

‘Needs to be a balance’

It’s not just the cumulative effects of industry on the landscape of Clearwater County’s mountain slopes that are a concern. Advocates also worry about the individual impacts of any potential coal mines.

The Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society is concerned the Blackstone and Aries projects, should either move forward, would impact habitat for bull trout and grizzly bears, both threatened species in Alberta and federally designated species at risk. The society says the Aries project, at its closest point, would be within one kilometre of the Ram River.

Advocates are concerned about the impacts of any potential coal activity on water quality. Streams and rivers in the area form an important part of the network of tributaries for drinking water for the prairies.

The Valory Resources Blackstone project site area is seen from above. Trees have been removed not far from the river that runs through it.

Some coal leases in the area are adjacent to rivers and streams that are excellent habitat for bull trout, a species at risk.

It’s a concern echoed by others concerned about the future of the region.

“One of the concerns, like with the Aries project, is contaminants can get into the groundwater, and ultimately end up in the Ram River, either by surface runoff or groundwater,” Vance Buchwald, a retired fisheries biologist, told The Narwhal. “And the lower Ram has one of the best bull trout populations in central Alberta.”

“Overall, provincially, we are losing the battle for bull trout,” he said. “All of these insults to the landscape are not helping.”

“There needs to be a balance,” Buchwald said of the multiple uses of the landscape. “I’m not convinced that we’re at the right balance.”

For advocates and long-time lovers of the land along the eastern slopes in Clearwater County, the loss of more wilderness to industrial activity remains a looming threat.

Advocates say once near-pristine wilderness is now marred by industrial development that hasn’t been carefully evaluated to determine the impacts of so much activity. Photo: Amber Bracken / The Narwhal / The Canadian Press

“There’s places where we used to hike into the backcountry and camp … it was a 30 or 40 kilometre hike in any direction to get to a road,” Boschman, the photographer in Red Deer, told The Narwhal.

“Fast forward to now and it’s all logging roads and clear cuts. That sort of land barely exists up there anymore — those big vast chunks of wilderness.”

Amber Bracken’s photos were shot for The Narwhal and The Canadian Press.

Updated July 10, 2021, at 9:30 a.m. MT: This article was updated to clarify that both grizzly bears and bull trout are federal designated species at risk and listed as threatened in Alberta.

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.

A broad coalition of landowners, conservation advocates and First Nations community members has requested Minister of Environment and Climate Change Jonathan Wilkinson require a federal impact assessment of the Tent Mountain mine project, a proposed coal mine in Alberta’s Rocky Mountains. 

Currently, the project is only set to undergo a review overseen by the Alberta Energy Regulator. 

The latest request follows other similar appeals from local ranchers, conservation groups and the tribal governments of the Blood Tribe/Kainai Nation and Siksika Nation, as well as months of backlash over the province’s push to expand coal mining in the Rockies.

The Tent Mountain mine would produce 4,925 tonnes of raw coal daily. A federal assessment is automatically triggered if a project will produce 5,000 tonnes. 

The coalition argues the mine is “exceptionally close” to that threshold. 

In a letter sent April 4 to Wilkinson, the groups argued the Tent Mountain project “is designed to skirt the thresholds [set out in regulations] to avoid being considered a designated project for a federal impact assessment” and urged the minister to take this into consideration.

Even when a project is under the threshold to automatically trigger an environmental assessment, the minister can still choose to require one. 

The coalition — which includes the Livingston Landowners Group, the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society and the Niitsítapi Water Protectors, and is represented by Ecojustice — argues the mine meets numerous criteria for undergoing a federal review, including impacts on fish and fish habitat, species of concern, Indigenous ways of life, the ability of Canada to meet its carbon pollution targets and environmentally sensitive landscapes, among other concerns related to federal jurisdiction. 

The coalition is concerned the provincial review process cannot address the myriad impacts of a coal mine in the region.

“We do not feel that the Alberta Energy Regulator is qualified to assess the project thoroughly and in a way that it needs to be assessed, primarily with the concerns of the impacts that this mining project will have on First Nation, Treaty and Aboriginal rights in the area,” Latasha Calf Robe, co-lead with the Niitsítapi Water Protectors, told The Narwhal.

Advocates say a federal assessment would include a more comprehensive review of the mine’s impacts.

A spokesperson for the Alberta Energy Regulator said in a lengthy emailed response to The Narwhal’s questions that its “review process is comprehensive and ensures that energy development is done in a manner that is safe and environmentally responsible.”

“I’m hopeful that [the federal government] will see the massive amount of adverse impacts will have on the environment, species at risk, Indigenous rights and the overall water quality,” Calf Robe said.

The Impact Assessment Agency of Canada told The Narwhal by email that the minister will issue a response to requests to designate a project for federal review by June 1.

The proposed Grassy Mountain and Tent Mountain mines are located in the eastern slopes of the Rocky Mountains. Map: Carol Linnitt / The Narwhal

Tent Mountain mine exempt from coal policy restrictions

Australia-based Montem Resources’ Tent Mountain mine, proposed in southern Alberta near Crowsnest Pass, would produce metallurgical coal used in steel-making.

The company plans to send coal mined at Tent Mountain by train to B.C.’s Westshore Terminal for export to markets including China, Japan, Korea, India, Brazil and western Europe. (Montem Resources did not respond to The Narwhal’s request for comment.)

The project is not bound by restrictions set out in the 1976 coal policy, which forbade most open-pit mining on category 2 lands. The mine is proposed primarily on category 4 land, which includes sites that were previously mined. Coal was discovered at Tent Mountain in the early 1900s and the site was mined on and off through to the early 1980s.

Despite its mountaintop location, the mine would also not be included in the province’s “outright ban” on mountaintop-removal mining, as the province’s definition of that term does not apply unless the top of a mountain is “completely” removed. 

Tent Mountain is located near the headwaters of the Oldman River, crucial for drinking water for the prairies and habitat for species at risk including bull trout and western cutthroat trout. 

“The Tent Mountain project is likely to have an impact on many topics under federal jurisdiction,” Katie Morrison, conservation director with the southern Alberta chapter of the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society, said in a statement, adding the mine represents “yet another significant increase in industrial activity in the area and deserves a thorough review by the federal assessment agency.”

The Tent Mountain mine project in southern Alberta is near the borders of B.C. and the United States. Advocates say the Alberta Energy Regulator lacks the ability to examine cumulative impacts across jurisdictions. “[The regulator] is really not well placed to give a proper assessment of this mine,” David Khan, a lawyer with Ecojustice, told The Narwhal. Photo: Callum Gunn

Provincial review ‘inadequate’: letter

Earlier this year, the Alberta Energy Regulator informed Montem Resources that its push to “reinstate” old mining permits — the mine hasn’t operated for approximately 40 years — were not sufficient for the company to forego the environmental assessment process, and ordered the company to conduct an environmental impact assessment. 

The regulator dubbed the company’s plans to be “substantial” and noted it “has received many concerns expressed by the public about coal mining activities in this area. As a consequence, the potential environmental impacts of the proposed recommencement of coal mining at the Tent Mountain mine warrant further consideration under the environmental assessment process.” 

But the groups requesting a federal review assert the provincial regulatory process in Alberta is “inadequate” on its own.

“Starting up a much larger mine after … years of inactivity warrants a thorough federal and provincial review, especially given the proposed mine’s location in our important headwaters region,” Bobbi Lambright, a spokesperson with the Livingstone Landowners Group, said in a statement.

David Khan, a lawyer with Ecojustice who is representing groups requesting a federal assessment told The Narwhal the Alberta Energy Regulator “has a very poor track record on looking at cumulative effects.”

“It has no jurisdiction to look at cumulative effects in B.C. or in the United States or in Manitoba or Saskatchewan, so it’s really not well placed to give a proper assessment of this mine,” he said. In its statement, a spokesperson for the regulator said “the study area for an environmental impact assessment is not limited to the proposed project’s footprint or restricted by provincial boundaries,” adding “where there are potential impacts to lands outside of Alberta, we will inform the affected jurisdiction about the project … In the case of Montem, their proposed project has the potential to have environmental impacts within BC. As such, we have informed BC’s Environmental Assessment Office.”

The groups Khan represents are adamant a federal impact assessment would be better poised to take into account a broader array of issues, and that the Alberta Energy Regulator “has a track record of proponent-friendly approvals.”

“The federal review process is more transparent and there’s more opportunity for public engagement,” Khan said. “It’s certainly more robust.” (The regulator said in its emailed statement that its review “may involve a public hearing to decide whether the project is in the public interest and whether it should be approved.”)

The Impact Assessment Agency of Canada told The Narwhal by email it has received the groups’ request to designate the Tent Mountain mine project for federal review and will prepare a recommendation for Minister Wilkinson. (Wilkinson’s office did not respond to The Narwhal’s request for comment by publication time.)

“The recommendation would consider whether the carrying out of the project may cause adverse effects within federal jurisdiction or adverse direct or incidental effects. In addition, the recommendation would consider the potential impacts of the project on the rights of the Indigenous peoples of Canada,” a spokesperson said by email.

The spokesperson for the Alberta Energy Regulator noted Montem Resources, the company behind the Tent Mountain coal project, had not yet filed all the necessary paperwork to trigger a provincial review and added “it is up to the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada to determine whether it wants to be involved in reviewing proposed energy development projects.”

Concerns about Indigenous ways of life

In early March, the tribal government of the Kainai Nation and the Office of Chief and Council of the Government of Siksika Nation also submitted requests to have the Tent Mountain mine project assessed by the federal government, listing concerns including contamination of drinking water for members living on Reserve and the hindering of the practice of Aboriginal and Treaty rights.

Calf Robe sees the mine as part of a larger trend of regional impacts related to industrial expansion, and is concerned about the impacts further development will have on her community.

“Given the intimate relationship between First Nations culture, language, ceremonial practices and the intimate relationships with the land there, we can foresee the long-lasting impacts that this will have on our rights to practise our traditional ways of life in the way that we have since time immemorial,” she said.

The Tent Mountain mine project and other proposed developments, she said, “are in essential areas where we continue to practise our ways of life.”

“It’s all tied together in this area. The impacts of mining [lead to] an unfortunate kind of domino effect that will bleed into all areas of life. It’ll go beyond just the right to hunt, trap and gather,” she added.

A federal review, she said, would be better poised to tackle these larger, cross-jurisdictional concerns. The spokesperson for the regulator said its assessment would “consider input from the Aboriginal Consultation Office about matters relating to indigenous consultation and actions that may be required to address potential adverse impacts on Treaty rights and traditional uses.”

“I’m hoping that if [the Tent Mountain mine project] goes through a federal review, the federal government will be more inclined to look at the cumulative impacts of all mining in the area … instead of looking at projects on a project-by-project basis,” Calf Robe said.

The Tent Mountain mine project and other proposed coal-mining activities “are in essential areas where we continue to practise our ways of life,” Latasha Calf Robe, co-lead with the Niitsítapi Water Protectors, told The Narwhal. Photo: Callum Gunn

Differences between tribal governments and community

The Niitsítapi Water Protectors wanted to submit a separate request to Wilkinson to represent community-level views on mining in the region, according to Calf Robe.

“We are a separate entity operating on a grassroots level. And I think that’s important to highlight because even with the consultation process, it usually is only done with elected leaders,” she said.

“And that doesn’t always encompass the views of the community, or provide opportunities for community-level engagement in First Nations communities,” she added.

For example, the tribal governments of the Blood Tribe/Kainai Nation and Siksika Nation supports the nearby Grassy Mountain mine, proposed by Benga Mining Limited, though both are pushing for a federal review of Tent Mountain.

“Support for the Grassy Mountain Mine Project does not mean that the Blood Tribe will support any further coal mine development in our traditional territory,” the tribal government of the Kainai Nation said in a January statement on Grassy Mountain.

“Chief and Council have clearly and forcefully communicated to the Government of Alberta that the Blood Tribe will not accept further coal mining development in the Crowsnest Pass Region,” it added.

“Other mine projects are proposed in very sensitive and mostly undisturbed areas of the Crowsnest Pass region that have the potential to impact grizzlies, bighorn sheep, elk and bull trout, as well as the headwaters of the Oldman and Livingstone Rivers which are source water to the Blood Tribe.”

Local ranchers like Mac Blades have also filed requests with the federal government to have the Tent Mountain mine designated for a federal review, citing concerns about the cumulative impacts of mining activity in the region on their grazing lands and water supply for livestock. Photo: Leah Hennel / The Narwhal

Previous request for federal review of coal mine successful

This isn’t the first coal project Ecojustice has flagged to the federal government for an impact assessment. 

Another coal project, the Vista coal mine, applied to expand its operations near Hinton in 2018.

The expansion involved increasing output by approximately 4.2 million tonnes of coal annually. Like the Tent Mountain coal project, the Vista expansion was just barely under the threshold to trigger a federal assessment. 

Khan, the lawyer with Ecojustice said he sees some “parallels” between the Vista expansion and Tent Mountain, and noted “proponents often try to craft their project proposals to avoid federal thresholds.”

In that case, the minister ultimately reversed course on earlier decisions and ordered a federal assessment be completed. 

The company behind the Vista expansion, Coalspur, has since requested a judicial review, alleging Wilkinson acted “unlawfully, unreasonably and unconstitutionally” in designating the project for a federal assessment.

But despite the judicial review, the federal environmental assessment is continuing for the Vista expansion.

Government ‘flip-flopping’ on coal policy: lawyer

This latest development in Alberta’s nearly year-long coal saga comes just as the Alberta government began unveiling its consultation process for a new coal policy.

For months, ranchers, First Nations groups, conservation advocates and country music stars have been voicing concerns about opening up more of Alberta’s Rocky Mountains and eastern slopes to potential coal mines.

For Khan, the diversity of voices opposed to coal developments in the region speaks to Albertans’ “lack of confidence in the Alberta government and their flip-flopping on the coal policy.”

“When there’s such a public outcry it means the public is extremely concerned with the project, or the plethora of projects, that are proposed in the Rocky Mountains,” he said. 

“It’s something the minister should really take seriously.”

Updated April 9, 2021, at 7 p.m. MT to include an emailed statement provided by the Alberta Energy Regulator

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.