Cover photo by Jon Martin, © 2021.
In part 1 of our coal mining blog, we explored information about what was happening with mining in the Oldman watershed and eastern slopes of the Rockies. We shared our top concerns for watershed health, potential impacts on key sectors, and foundational knowledge about coal mining in Alberta. Before you proceed with reading this blog, please read through Part 1 to get up to speed.
Over the past few months we’ve had an outpouring of questions and concerns about coal mines from community members. In this blog, we will answer the questions we have received most often. We encourage you to continue asking questions about the implications of coal mining in our watershed. Further, we suggest that you follow government and local officials, topical experts, scientists, and other credible sources of information so that you can form an informed opinion based on accurate, factual information.
What We Are Hearing
We have heard a number of concerns and desires regarding coal mining in the province, each of which reflects our regional diversity and how strongly people value watershed health. Among these concerns are environmental degradation and habitat loss; water pollution; the desire to see reliable, long-term green jobs that take advantage of the natural values of the Rocky Mountains; an aversion to pursuing “boom and bust” economic routes; the loss of recreational opportunities; negative impacts on existing sectors, including agriculture, tourism and lifestyle amenities.
We have also heard support voiced for the jobs, new businesses, and community investments mines would bring to small towns like the Municipality of Crowsnest Pass and Town of Pincher Creek. The Government of Alberta and many others have indicated support for the economic opportunities, royalties, and tax revenues coal mines would generate. Community members have also voiced a desire to acknowledge that the metallurgical steel made from the type of coal proposed to be mined is used to construct buildings and make cars.
Photo by Jon Martin, © 2021.
Implications of the 1976 Coal Policy Being Rescinded
In May of 2020, the provincial government rescinded the 1976 Coal Policy—a protective policy put in place by the government of Peter Lougheed which determined where open-pit coal mines were permitted and where they were not desirable. By rescinding this policy, the government opened up category 2 lands to coal exploration and potentially open-pit mining. Previously, these activities were generally not permitted. Other lands, including those designated as category 1, are still protected by a government order. Open-pit mining was already allowed on category 3 and 4 lands, but subject to assurances that the environment would be protected and reclaimed.
The proposed Grassy Mountain Coal Project is on category 4 lands, and as such, it is allowed to proceed through the application process. That means that—even if the 1976 Coal Policy was still in place—the project would be able to continue through the regulatory review process. Montem Resources’ proposed reactivation of the old Tent Mountain mine is also on category 4 lands. Similarly, it is unaffected by the 1976 Coal Policy and can proceed through the permitting process. What this means, is that—regardless of the Coal Policy being in place or not—there could be two open-pit coal mines in Crowsnest Pass in the near future (contingent on regulators approving necessary permits and licenses).
Photo by Jon Martin, © 2021.
Since the 1976 Coal Policy was eliminated in May of last year, the Canadian Press reports that 1.4 million hectares of Crown coal rights have been sold across Alberta. In December of 2020, approximately 2000 hectares of Crown coal rights were sold in areas north of Crowsnest Pass and the Upper Oldman. This Oldman watershed land was former category 2 land where open-pit coal mines were generally not allowed. According to the accepted offers posted by Government of Alberta, they were purchased by Montem Resources Ltd. and Benga Mining Ltd. However, in January 2021, facing public outcry and viral social media posts from prominent Albertan musicians—the first being a video from Oldman watershed resident Corb Lund—the Government cancelled the sales of leases completed in December 2020. However, there is still a large amount of land in the headwaters of the Oldman watershed with active Crown coal rights that is being explored for potential coal mining.
You can explore what lands have active Crown coal rights on this map viewer of Alberta.
Currently, First Nations, ranchers, municipalities, and environmental non-profits are fighting the government in court to reinstate the 1976 Coal Policy and hold meaningful public consultations with First Nations and Albertans before changes are made. Court proceedings began the week of January 18, 2021 and a decision is not expected for months.
Are coal mines open?
No. There are currently no open-pit coal mines actively operating in the Oldman watershed. However, four companies who own Crown coal rights are exploring the coal deposits to better understand the quality and quantity of the coal, and the value to their business.
Coal exploration does have its own impact on the watershed: new roads are being built in areas that are already fragmented and have a high density of linear features. This can contribute to additional runoff of sediment into nearby creeks, which can negatively affect fish habitat and water quality.
To start a new mining operation, companies must go through an application process that involves an Environmental Impact Assessment and consultation with First Nations and the public. Mines over a certain size require both federal and provincial approval, a process usually done simultaneously through a Joint Federal-Provincial Review Panel. This was the case with the Grassy Mountain Coal Project, where public hearings were held from October to December 2020.
Grassy Mountain Coal Project
The OWC submitted a final statement to the Joint Federal-Provincial Review Panel in September 2020. It was presented virtually to the Panel on October 28, 2020. You can view the video portion of our presentation here. In December, the public hearing for this project was completed and full participants recently submitted their final arguments. The Panel has until June 18, 2021 to prepare their report and a recommendation to approve or reject the project. The report and recommendation are submitted to the federal Minister of Environment and Climate Change. The federal Minister, who is ultimately responsible for the final decision, will then have five months to review the report and decide whether to approve, or reject, the application. The earliest we can expect a decision to be made is September 2021.
The decision on the Grassy Mountain mine is significant because this is the first coal mine to go through the joint review process in our watershed in recent times. As such, it will set a precedent for coal mining in our watershed and provide an indication of what to expect from similar mining applications in the future.
There is a lot of speculation about whether the federal government will approve or reject the Grassy Mountain project. Looking at the 2019 Canadian Minerals and Metals Plan can provide insight into what federal and provincial governments have agreed to. The Plan pursues “the vision that Canada is the leading mining nation” and includes a key principle that “responsible mineral development integrates the concept of sustainability—human, social, economic, and environmental”.
Photo by Jon Martin, © 2021.
However, outright approval or rejection of the project are not the only options. There could be a conditional approval requiring the operator to abide by specific terms or have permits rescinded. According to a recent survey, climate change is currently the number one issue for Canadians (even during a global pandemic), with 78% of Canadians indicating they are “very concerned about the negative impact of climate change on future generations.” Public attitude and opinion could also influence the development of new, creative conditions attached to an approval to make it more palatable to the Albertans and Canadians who are opposed to it.
The Oldman Watershed Council made several recommendations to regulators, many of which could be conditions of an approval. This includes 1) incorporating robust, independent surface and groundwater monitoring, 2) piloting proposed mitigation strategies to ensure they will work, 3) collecting adequate reclamation bonds so that taxpayers are not left with the burden of having to foot the bill for clean-up efforts, 4) ensuring new habitat is created when offsets are used, and 5) establishing easily accessible public reporting of all monitoring and assessments.
What happens if multiple coal mines are approved in the Oldman watershed?
Having multiple mines means the potential for negative impacts on fish, wildlife, and the watershed is greater. This is why cumulative effects assessments are so important. These types of assessments look at the entire landscape and everything that is happening on it to understand what the holistic impact is on water, wildlife, habitat, and overall ecosystem function. If we only evaluate one project in one location at a time, we risk missing the bigger picture challenges.
The potential for selenium contamination of waterways is our greatest concern for the watershed and all the people that depend on it. If multiple mines were to be operating at the same time, the risk that selenium concentrations may increase above safe limits in our downstream creeks and rivers is larger. If the proposed water treatment processes and impoundment structures are effective, water quality may not be affected. But, if they do not perform as well as proponents are expecting, we could have a very serious problem downstream for fish, municipalities and agriculture in the future. It could take years for selenium levels to increase beyond safe limits for fish, agriculture, and humans, giving companies time to address the problem.
Photo by Jon Martin, © 2021.
But there is a risk that efforts could fail, as we have seen across the border with British Columbia in the Elk Valley, where after decades of mining, selenium levels are exceeding safe limits and contamination has travelled far downstream. Teck Resources Limited has developed promising water treatment processes that are helping to address the problem of selenium contamination. However, the treatment processes have not been in operation for a long period of time and so scientific research is ongoing to evaluate if these methods are effective over the long term.
Closer to home in Alberta, there are elevated levels of selenium downstream of coal mines on the McLeod and Gregg Rivers and Luscar Creek, all east of Jasper. A Government of Alberta report shows the concentrations in 1998-1999 were above safe limits for fish and the aquatic ecosystem, and some samples were above the safe limits for agricultural uses. Even though some of these mines are reclaimed, or in the process of being reclaimed, the selenium contamination persists. Recent scientific reports about this situation are lacking. Data needs to be analyzed and reported publicly so that Albertans can better understand the potential impacts of coal mines.
Photo by Jon Martin, © 2021.
Native fish already struggling to survive, like westslope cutthroat trout and bull trout, would have to cope with additional stress. They face increasing challenges as the climate warms and adding another land use to an already busy landscape could further contribute to their decline. Native trout help keep our aquatic ecosystems functioning properly and are bio-indicators telling us whether our mountain water is cold and clear.
Water
Water licensing, allocation, and use is a complex topic. We will focus on that specifically in our next blog as part of the Navigating Our Future series.
Social and Economic Impacts
We acknowledge that there would be both positive and negative impacts of coal mining on our communities. While the OWC plays a significant role in stewarding our watershed, it is up to government and elected decision-makers to make these tough decisions. Our job is to provide them with information so that the decisions made are based on science, data, and broad community feedback.
Photo by Jon Martin, © 2021.
The OWC’s expertise is watershed management and health—that is the type of information that we are sharing with decision makers and the public. We encourage everyone to take the initiative and inform themselves about the social and economic impacts, both positive and negative.
There is an abundance of information about these topics in relation to the Grassy Mountain Coal Project on the Impact Agency of Canada website. The Crowsnest Conservation Society based in Crowsnest Pass completed an informal survey of local residents and summarized their findings, as well as other local issues, in their final statement to the Joint Review Panel. The final statement made by project proponent Benga Mining Ltd. outlines information about the potential social and economic benefits.
Share Your Views
No matter what your opinion is, we encourage you to share it with your elected officials at the provincial and federal levels. It is important that decision makers hear from their constituents—they were elected to represent you.
We encourage you to write to your local MLA, MP, municipal council, as well as the federal Minister of Environment and Climate Change, Jonathan Wilkinson, and provincial Minister of Environment and Parks, Jason Nixon.
In the next installment of Navigating Our Future, we will look at water licensing, allocation, and use. Stay tuned!
