Through language such as “optimizing” and “modernization,” Alberta Minister of Environment and Parks Jason Nixon may have thought he had a political winner when he made his announcement back in March to remove 164 sites from the Alberta Parks system — an ambition that might have been furthered by the promise to save taxpayers a bit of money. Instead, he’s had to endure an avalanche of criticism. 

Much of that criticism has flowed from the passion that Albertans have for public parks and spaces where they can get out into nature. Nixon’s decision proved to be so unpopular that, instead of proudly displaying all the under-utilized areas he was targeting, the list of parks quietly disappeared from the government’s website.

Parks are much more than just places to play. Whether large or small, parks are refuges that protect valuable, often rare, landscapes. This government decision to cut parks increases the existential threat to some of Alberta’s most endangered and least protected natural regions: the Parkland, Grassland and Foothills. More than half the sites losing their protected status fall within these regions. Nearly 90 square kilometres of protection (about half the size of Elk Island National Park) will be lost.  

Given Alberta’s size, some might argue this reduction is inconsequential. But these regions are already at great risk: less than two per cent of Parkland, Grassland and Foothills have been designated for protection; they aren’t in a position to afford losses.

Take a closer look at the Grassland, which provides critical habitat for over three-quarters of Alberta’s species at-risk. As of 2018, only 1.25 per cent of its landscapes were protected through government-recognized parks and conservation areas. This new “optimization” will strip away five per cent of that existing protection.

At least three locations that are up for removal (Little Fish Lake, Gooseberry Lake and sites along Buffalo Lake) contain important habitat for piping plover, a recognized endangered species under the federal Species at Risk Act. Ghost Airstrip Provincial Recreation Area, meanwhile, contains critical habitat for westslope cutthroat trout, another at-risk species.

These sites will either be turned over to third-party partnerships or will become vacant public lands. Either way, the cost and responsibility to manage local species and ecosystems will fall into new hands. And, to date, no assurance has been provided by the provincial government on how third-party partners will respect the conservation objectives these lands had as part of the Alberta Parks system. 

The damage this decision will do to protection is rooted in the likelihood these lands will no longer be governed by Alberta’s Provincial Parks Act. Under the act, sites are managed for two primary purposes: conservation and accessible recreation. A designated site is about more than just being a point on a map — it’s a form of targeted investment into infrastructure, ecosystem management and long-term planning. Other laws, such as the Public Lands Act, lack the conservation focus.

The need for sound parks management, education and enforcement is growing ever more apparent as public lands see a rise in popularity among Albertans during the COVID-19 pandemic. On top of this, we face unprecedented global declines in biodiversity, including in Canada. Now is the time to strengthen — not weaken — our networks of parks and protected areas, especially in Alberta’s most endangered natural regions.

Alberta’s renewed bet on coal: what Kenney’s policy shift means for mining, parks and at-risk 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.

Amid a global economic slowdown spurred by the spread of COVID-19, Alberta’s government is paving the way for a resurgence of coal mining in the province, a move some observers say threatens sensitive ecosystems that, until June, had been protected for decades.

This spring, the United Conservative Party government rolled back protections that had restricted exploration and prevented open-pit coal mining across parts of the Rocky Mountains and Foothills since 1976.

The decision, which was announced in mid-May and came into force June 1, was framed as part of Alberta’s economic recovery. “Rescinding the outdated coal policy in favour of modern oversight will help attract new investment for an important industry and protect jobs for Albertans,” Energy Minister Sonya Savage said in a statement at the time. 

The provincial economy was hit hard this year, first by the oil price war between Russia and Saudia Arabia, then by an unprecedented plunge in demand for oil due to the pandemic. And as restaurants, movie theatres, hair salons and many other businesses closed their doors to stem the spread of the novel coronavirus, unemployment shot up. In June, the province’s unemployment rate was 15.5 per cent.

“As we strengthen our focus on economic recovery and revitalization, we will continue to make common-sense decisions to create certainty and flexibility for industry, while ensuring sensitive lands are protected for Albertans to continue to enjoy,” Savage said in May.

The concern for some Albertans, though, is that the government’s open-for-business stance on coal threatens to destroy a landscape that is important to First Nations and serves as critical habitat for grizzlies, caribou and the Alberta population of westslope cutthroat trout, listed as threatened under the federal Species At Risk Act.

“It’s a backwards move,” said Marlene Poitras, the Assembly of First Nations regional chief for Alberta. The decision to rescind protections was made without adequately consulting with First Nations, she said.

Shaun Fluker, an associate law professor at the University of Calgary, said “the timing is very unfortunate and seems calculated to implement a change like this at a time or a moment when negative feedback or criticism or resistance would be difficult to mount.”

“The government certainly could have waited to make this announcement at a time when more public dialogue was possible and feasible,” he said.

“You could say they used the public health emergency as a cloak to defend against any criticism that might attract.”

Here’s what you may have missed about Alberta’s mid-pandemic bid for coal.

Energy Minister Sonya Savage has said rescinding the coal policy will ‘help attract new investment’ for the mining industry. Photo: Government of Alberta / Flickr

The 1976 Alberta coal policy

In 1976, Alberta released a wide-ranging coal development policy that covered land use planning, royalties, labour requirements, landowner rights and environmental protections. 

Many of these provisions were either not enforced or had previously been replaced with updated measures. Until June 1, the land classification system, which divided the province into four land categories that allowed varying levels of coal exploration and development, was the only portion of the policy that remained in place.

Category 1 lands — where coal leasing, exploration and development were not permitted — will continue to be protected. 

Previously, surface mining was banned on category 2 lands, which included parts of the Rocky Mountains and the Foothills, and exploration and underground development was limited. Exploration was allowed on lands listed as category 3 under the normal process but development in these areas was restricted. Now, restrictions on category 2 and 3 lands have been removed.

Companies with coal agreements on category 2 and 3 lands no longer face development restrictions that had been in place under the 1976 policy. Map: Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society

According to the Alberta government, the intent of the 1976 coal policy “was to ensure that there were appropriate regulatory and environmental protection measures in place before new coal projects were authorized.” 

While the province says the coal policy is replaced by “modern regulatory processes, integrated planning and land use policies,” some experts are quick to note that regional land use plans have not yet been completed for the entire area previously protected by the coal policy.

The 1976 document “was an overarching policy that gave direction to the regulator and specifically said certain activities are acceptable in this area, but they’re not acceptable in other areas,” explained Brenda Heelan Powell, staff counsel at the Environmental Law Centre.

“That gives a signal to the regulator on cumulative effects and appropriate development,” she said. “And while that could happen through the regional planning, it’s not complete for that entire area.”

A regional plan has been completed for the South Saskatchewan region in southern Alberta, but the planning process is ongoing in the North Saskatchewan region, which includes parts of the Rockies and Foothills, and has yet to begin in other areas.

In the absence of an overarching land-use policy that guards against the cumulative effects of resource development, coal projects are likely to be assessed on a project by project basis, Heelan Powell said.

Alberta has duty to consult First Nations

While Poitras said the government spoke with some Treaty 7 First Nations that would be directly impacted by coal mining, she said others, including some Treaty 6 nations whose traditional lands are affected by the decision, were not consulted.

“We have three numbered treaties in Alberta — 6, 7 and 8 — and any time there’s any impacts to those treaties, the government has a duty to consult,” she said.

The government’s decision to open previously protected lands to coal development has the potential to cause lasting harm, Poitras said.

“We’re stewards of the land and when issues like that occur, where there’s environmental damage that is going to occur…that is a concern to many First Nations.”

“The mountains are sacred to our people for traditional ceremonies and gathering medicines that are harder to get in some other areas,” she said. 

The future of Alberta’s parks

Crow Lake Provincial Park in northern Alberta is one of several parks slated for closure by the UCP government. Photo: Alberta Parks

Earlier this year, Premier Jason Kenney’s government announced plans to transfer the management of 164 sites in the parks system to third parties. The CBC reported that roughly a third of those sites are located on lands where mining restrictions have been lifted.

(Alberta also said it would fully or partially shutter 20 provincial parks, but postponed closing 17 of them to ensure adequate space for camping during the pandemic.)

While Fluker said the decision to close or transfer management of provincial parks and recreation sites was probably aimed at reducing government expenses, other measures are “really about opening up public lands to more economic development, which in Alberta tends to be natural resources development.”

Katie Morrison, the conservation director of the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society’s Southern Alberta chapter, noted a few of these recreational areas are surrounded by coal leases.

“It shows the risk that these places are under once their protections are removed, but I think it’s also quite indicative of how this government views the value of public lands,” she said.

“They see them as commodities for resource extraction.”

Alberta’s backyard: photos of the ten provincial parks and recreation areas that are now completely shut down

Increase in Alberta mining activity poses threat to at-risk species

Morrison said a lot of the areas previously protected under category 2 of the coal policy are important headwaters that provide drinking water to millions of Albertans downstream.

These areas are also important habitat for grizzly bears, elk, caribou and, significantly, the threatened westslope cutthroat trout (WSCT).

The southwest corner of the province is “really the last stronghold for that species,” Fluker said.

In a recent paper in the Public Land and Resources Law Review, Fluker and his co-author David Mayhood point to overexploitation, habitat destruction and hybridization with introduced species such as rainbow trout as causes for the decline of westslope cutthroat trout in Alberta.

“The story told here about the decline of the Alberta population of WSCT is certainly not an isolated one. Habitat loss is widely understood as the primary cause for the extinction crisis sweeping the planet,” the authors write.

“What is noteworthy about the ongoing decline of the Alberta population of WSCT is that losses continue despite the population falling under the protection of a threatened species legal framework.”

Opening previously protected areas to open-pit coal mining could further strain this already threatened species.

“It really undermines the whole point of the Species At Risk Act if you have a threatened species with very little remaining known critical habitat and you approve a coal mine that basically wipes out some of that habitat and potentially pollutes more of it downstream,” said Fluker, who has been working with a public interest law clinic at the University of Calgary to push for more aggressive protections for cutthroat trout for a number of years.

New coal mines emerging in Alberta as a result of the government’s recent policy change could shape up to be a high-profile battleground between industry and threatened species, Fluker said.

As well as providing key habitat for fish and wildlife, Morrison noted the region is also used for recreation and ranching. 

“Once a mine is built, that is not an area that the public can access, it’s not an area that’s used for grazing or other uses,” she said.

“These mines are massive, mountaintop removal mines,” she said, noting there are concerns not only about the quantity of water used, but also risks of contamination.

In B.C., there have been long-standing concerns about selenium pollution downstream of Teck Resources’ Elk Valley coal mines.

“We can learn from the Elk Valley and other places that went ahead with massive developments and the problems that they’re dealing with now and try to avoid that scenario for ourselves,” she said.

Unique B.C. trout population suffers 93 per cent crash downstream of Teck’s Elk Valley coal mines

UCP government opens doors to coal mining resurgence 

Alberta is already the second largest producer of coal in Canada, and last year 67 per cent of coal produced in the province was subbituminous coal, a lower grade used for electricity generation. According to the Alberta Energy Regulator, subbituminous coal production is expected to decline by more than 90 per cent between 2020 and 2029 with the phase-out of coal-fired electricity.

The new areas available for open-pit coal mining open a window to additional production of metallurgical coal, which is used to make steel.

“Just across the border, the province of British Columbia has a successful metallurgical coal industry and the demand for high-quality steelmaking coal will continue to grow,” Kavi Bal, press secretary to Alberta Energy Minister Sonya Savage, said in a statement to The Narwhal.

Teck’s Elk Valley metallurgical coal mining operations have come under criticism for their impacts on the environment. Photo: Garth Lenz

A new metallurgical coal mine, the Grassy Mountain project proposed near the Crowsnest Pass in Alberta, is currently going through a joint provincial-federal environmental review. If built, it could more than double production of steelmaking coal in Alberta.

In the areas where restrictions on the issuance of coal leases have recently been lifted, Alberta Energy is offering a first right of refusal to companies that have existing applications for coal rights. 

The Coal Association of Canada did not respond to The Narwhal’s request for comment. But in May, association president Robin Campbell told CTV there were already multiple companies considering coal mines in the Foothills and that each new mine could employ between 300 and 350 people.

If Grassy Mountain is approved, Morrison said other projects in the exploration phase may decide to move forward with their own mine applications.

It “would give an indication that governments think that is an appropriate use of the landscape,” she said.

Instead, before any new mines are approved Morrison said she wants the province to undertake a detailed land-use planning process to determine whether those landscapes could handle resource development. 

In the meantime, one of the province’s existing mines, which exports thermal coal for electricity generation elsewhere, could face a new hurdle in its efforts to expand. The federal government recently said it is reconsidering its decision from last year to exempt the proposed Vista mine expansion, near Hinton, from a federal impact assessment. 

Environment and Climate Change Minister Jonathan Wilkinson is expected to make a decision by July 30 on whether to proceed with a federal assessment, Moira Kelly, a spokesperson for the minister, said in a statement to The Narwhal. 

“Our government has also launched a strategic assessment on thermal coal to better understand the potential impact of thermal coal mining activity, to ensure effects within federal jurisdiction — especially related to climate change — are fully considered in the federal impact assessment process,” she said.

Life after coal

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.

It didn’t exactly come as a surprise. For months, pollsters have been predicting a sweeping win for Jason Kenney and his United Conservative Party (UCP).

Here we are: the election theatrics are over, and Alberta is settling in with a new premier-elect. Now what?

We know where the party stands on pipeline issues, but what else has the UCP promised it will do when it comes to energy and the environment?

Welcome to a new world — a world of “war rooms,” red-tape reductions and some rapid-fire repeals of existing programs and legislation.

1. Regulation? Let’s cut it.

Kenney has made it clear that a UCP government will be all about “streamlining” and “efficiencies.”

As part of that plan, the UCP government will ramp up approvals for new energy projects. Kenney described his plan as a “rapid acceleration of approvals.”

At the same time, his “red tape reduction action plan” will “cut red tape by a third.” There will be a new so-called “one-in, one-out” rule that will require that every new regulation created is offset by the elimination of an existing regulation.

He’ll even appoint a “Minister for Red Tape Reduction.”

Red tape, according to the UCP, is a “costly and growing burden” that “kills jobs.”

2. Parks: privatized services and more booze!

Given the heated backlash over the province’s Bighorn Country proposal earlier this year, it won’t come as a surprise if the UCP doesn’t pursue the planned parks and recreation areas.

Kenney had previously described the NDP’s Bighorn land-use plans as “an extreme approach to land use which cuts out local residents and legitimate economical and recreational use.”

The UCP has, however, pledged to provide $10 million to support the creation of a new urban provincial park within Edmonton city limits.

It has also pledged that “major environmental protection proposals” will be subject to a review of their economic impacts to ensure they are not harmful to the economy — a “balance,” the party says, to current environmental impact assessments of industrial projects.

The party’s platform outlines an increased emphasis of partnerships with park societies, and suggests the UCP will support increased volunteer activities to maintain parks.

An initial pilot project will determine if nearly all park services could be privatized, by examining “whether park societies could effectively be contracted to assume all park management responsibilities from [Alberta Environment and Parks], with the exception of enforcement.”

But, hey — soon we’ll be able to relax with a glass of wine after a long day of trail maintenance. The UCP has pledged to “relax liquor constraints in a number of provincial parks” as well as loosening liquor laws in municipal parks.

3. Support for renewables? Nah.

Alberta’s NDP government committed to source 30 per cent of the province’s electricity from renewable energy sources by 2030.

The UCP government has not made any similar commitments and, in the party’s platform, it’s made clear that subsidies to a fledgling renewable energy industry are not in the cards.

Instead, it says it will “welcome market-driven green power.”

As part of the UCP’s carbon-emissions reduction plan (more on that soon), funds raised will go toward “Alberta-based technologies that reduce carbon emissions.”

But the platform does not list renewable energy as an example of these technologies (Alberta has some decades-long contracts with alternative energy providers and the future of those contracts are unclear). Instead, the UCP focuses on carbon capture and new oilsands extraction technology.

Currently, coal is the biggest source of electricity in the province.

4. Making the province’s industry-funded energy watchdog more industry-friendly

Kenney wants to reduce regulation across the government, but he particularly wants to reduce what he calls red tape at the Alberta Energy Regulator, the industry-funded corporation responsible for enforcing rules surrounding the province’s energy industry.

This is the same regulator that issues 97 per cent of reclamation certificates without sending an inspector out to the oil or gas well in question for a field audit.

A Kenney government is promising to “identify efficiencies” within the regulator within the first 180 days of forming government.

5. Oilsands emissions cap?

What oilsands emissions cap?

Kenney has promised he will “absolutely” scrap the cap.

The oilsands emissions cap was enacted to limit emissions from the oilsands to 100 megatonnes. The province currently estimates total emissions to be around 70 megatonnes.

Canada’s climate commitments include an 80 per cent reduction of greenhouse gas emissions below 2005 levels by 2050. This means cutting total emissions to 150 megatonnes — across the entire country — in three decades.

Projects that have already received approvals add up to 131 megatonnes, according to the Pembina Institute. But even if emissions from the oilsands were capped at Alberta’s old 100-megatonne cap — they would take up two-thirds of Canada’s total emissions budget by 2050.

6. Goodbye, Energy Efficiency Alberta

In early March — before the election got underway — Kenney made headlines for announcing that Albertans “don’t need bureaucrats changing our shower heads and our light bulbs.”

According to the Edmonton Journal, Kenney also said “programs under the agency would be ‘gone.’ ”

Energy Efficiency Alberta is a public agency mandated to support reductions in energy consumption in homes and businesses across the province, and is supported in part by revenue from the carbon tax.

Alberta was the only jurisdiction in North America to not have any energy efficiency agency prior to the program’s launch in early 2017.

7. Adios, carbon tax

One of the first promises of UCP leader Jason Kenney’s platform was well-known, and oft-repeated: The UCP government will scrap the carbon tax — on day one — boasting that, “at $1.4 billion, this will be the largest tax cut in Alberta’s history.”

Carbon pricing was enacted by Alberta premier Rachel Notley in 2015. The program involves collecting a levy on carbon-producing activities, then reinvesting that money into designated programs, as well as returning a portion of the funds to taxpayers through a means-based rebate program.

When Alberta repeals its own carbon-pricing plan, the federal government’s system will be put into place by default.

The UCP has a plan to target large industrial emitters, defined as “existing facilities with emissions above 100,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide.”

Those large emitters will be required to reduce their emissions intensity, which is not the same as total emissions (intensity refers to a ratio with economic output).

Large emitters will be required to reduce emissions intensity by 10 per cent initially (then increasing by one per cent per year), compared to their own emissions, averaged out between 2016 and 2018.

Large emitters that fail to reduce their emissions by the required benchmark will either pay a per-tonne price (lower than the current price) or buy offsets.

The UCP’s plan — called the Technology Innovation and Emissions Reduction (TIER) Fund — has been criticized as being a “symbolic” tax that will not be as effective in incentivizing reductions in carbon emissions as a broad-based carbon-pricing scheme.

8. Hello, lawsuit

Kenney has a plan to fight back against the federal carbon tax that will be imposed on Alberta. He’ll sue.

The UCP will “challenge the constitutionality of the Trudeau carbon tax by filing a judicial reference to the Court of Appeal, while continuing to support similar challenges by the governments of Saskatchewan and Ontario.”

Ontario’s Progressive Conservative party budgeted $30 million for its lawsuit, and Saskatchewan, Manitoba and New Brunswick have since joined in on the fight, too.

9. What about Alberta’s inactive oil and gas well crisis?

The Narwhal reported earlier this month that the Alberta Energy Regulator had privately predicted that the number of inactive wells in the province will double in the coming decade unless there’s a significant change in policy.

In a presentation obtained through a freedom of information request, the regulator noted that without the implementation of deadlines on when wells need to be plugged or cleaned up, and without a more robust tool for assessing whether companies can actually afford to clean up after drilling is done, the province has “a problem.”

In 1999, there were 30,000 inactive wells in the province. By 2030, the regulator is predicting there could be 180,000.

The cost of cleaning these wells up has been pegged at $100 billion.

The UCP’s platform includes a few measures to request help from the federal government in incentivizing well clean-up, but few other specifics on how the government will curb the problem, which has been described as “a massive ticking time bomb.”

10. Remember our fight with B.C. over wine? Let’s do that again, but bigger

In the final days of the election campaign, Kenney amped up his anti-B.C. rhetoric, mocking Vancouver’s goal of being zero-emissions by 2040, and taunting the city’s mayor by announcing that a Kenney government would ensure “a carbon-free Vancouver by 2020” . . . by turning off the taps and restricting shipments of Alberta fuel to B.C.

The threat is in the party’s platform, too. The party pledges it will “use the ‘Turn off the Taps’ legislation should provinces, including British Columbia, continue to obstruct the construction of pipelines.”

Gas prices in the Lower Mainland of B.C are already reaching record levels.

11. Fights — expect more of   ’em

We’re going to fight the carbon tax.

We’re going to fight Trudeau.

We’re going to fight Horgan.

We’re going to fight the Canadian confederation.

We’re going to fight environmental charities.

We’re going to fight foreign “special interests.”

We’re going to fight HSBC.

The UCP platforms declares that the Alberta government will boycott companies, such as HSBC, that boycott Alberta products.

It also states the party will “ask the energy industry to significantly increase its advocacy efforts” and will “support” companies willing to do so.

A UCP government will also “challenge the charitable status of groups that are funneling foreign money into anti-Alberta campaigns.”

(But wait, in the era of global markets and multinational corporations, what is all this foreign-funding talk even referring to?)

It all adds up to a lot of fighting.

12. Expect to hear a lot more about ‘foreign-funded environmentalists.’ We’re getting an energy war room!

Jason Kenney has been busy touring around Alberta touting the conclusions of Vancouver-based blogger Vivian Krause, who he describes as “intrepid,” saying she “deserves a great deal of credit.”

He’s planning to launch what he calls an “energy war room,” which will, in the words of the UCP’s platform, “fight fake news and share the truth about Alberta’s resource sector and energy issues.”

The war room will have a $30 million annual budget.

Its goal? To “stand up to well-funded foreign special interests who have been waging a decade-long campaign to landlock Alberta’s oil and gas with their campaign of defamation.”

If you’re scratching your head, read this. And then maybe go have a glass of wine in a park.  

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.