Land-use framework puts conservation areas back on Alberta's agenda

On July 31st, 2009, the Alberta government formally released the Terms of Reference for the Lower Athabasca Regional Plan under the Land-use Framework (LUF). The terms of reference (ToR) guides the Lower Athabasca Regional Advisory Council (RAC) who will make recommendations to government for the regional land-use plan. The ToR also sets the tone for what can be expected for other forthcoming land-use plans. One significant and encouraging shift heralded by the ToR is the return of conservation areas as a tool in Alberta to maintain ecosystems and habitat. These potential conservation areas would be established to offset the industrial activities - namely oil sands development. Conservation areas that limit or restrict development can be an effective planning tool to protect water sources including rivers, lakes and wetlands.

According to the ToR, "It...makes sense that conservation objectives for the Lower Athabasca be established within the context of the Boreal forest." More specifically, conservation areas would include:

• areas with little or no industrial activity
• areas that support Aboriginal traditional uses;
• areas that are representative of the biological diversity of the area
• areas of sufficient size 4,000 to 5,000 km2

 

Conservation areas - coming and going from Alberta's management toolbox

Historic efforts to set aside land or place development restrictions for conservation and recreation areas have had mixed results. While there is broad recognition for tools like zoning to maintain agricultural lands and other desired land-use types, "protected areas" have cycled in and out of favour within government as they face the charge that land is "locked up" or "sterilized" for development. Between 1995 and 2001, Alberta's Special Places program was offered the main context for creating protected areas in Alberta. The Special Places program had uneven success across the province, however. The program's structure of Local Committees and Provincial Coordinating Committee tended to favour stakeholders who wanted to dig in their heels for the status quo. So while the program had a number of successes protecting areas such as the Wilmore Wilderness, it also created designations of little value like the Castle River Special Management, which has done little to protect the biodiversity and the water resources of the Castle region of southern Alberta.

After the completion of Special Places, bureaucrats and government officials often stated that Alberta had completed its protected area planning process. However, many Albertans interested in conserving or creating additional protection for areas to protect water resources, biodiversity or aesthetic purposes believed the designation of such areas was not finished. In fact, there is new science suggesting that protecting areas such as the Eastern Slopes for water supply and quality provides a substantial benefit to all Albertans. The Alberta Wilderness Association among others predicted in 2001 the drive for protected areas would continue concluding, "It might be over for [the government of Alberta], but it's not over for us."

Today, the Land-use Framework has come to dominate the dialogue around land management decisions in Alberta. However, the government has been ambiguous about how the LUF would address protected or conservation areas. The LUF Policy released in December 2008, for instance, does not include creating protected areas in its seven core strategies.

So, the inclusion of conservation areas within the ToR for the Lower Athabasca is encouraging, but the legal status of these areas will be important. The ToR is ambiguous about how the areas will be constituted and maintained in light of constant pressure from industry. Historically legislated protection has been the strongest security in the province to ensure such conservation areas endure.

Conservation Areas for the Lower Athabasca Region

The recently issued Terms of Reference (ToR) ask the Regional Advisory Committee to explore the feasibility of meeting a conservation scenario "higher than 20 percent while achieving the stated economic objectives." It is important to note the ToR encourages consideration of conservation objectives substantially higher than 20 percent of the region. Objectives higher than 20 percent have already been recommended by the Cumulative Environmental Management Association (CEMA), a multi-stakeholder group including the oil sands industry to study the cumulative environmental effects of industrial development in the region. The CEMA approved framework, Terrestrial Ecosystem Management Framework (TEMF), was submitted to the government June 5th, 2008 recommending between 20 and 40 percent of the region be maintained in conservation areas. The Canadian Boreal Initiative, an organization dedicated to convening conservation organizations, First Nations, industry and other interested parties on boreal issues, recommends a goal of protecting 50 percent of the Boreal across Canada. To its credit, the Lower Athabasca ToR cites both these recommendations.

Caution is warranted, however. The mandate of the ToR for the RAC is open to interpretation and flexible. Exploring scenarios of higher than 20 percent conservation areas does not guarantee that conservation areas will be created as they appear to be contingent on reaching economic objectives. Resolving these environmental and economic targets will present the RAC with a considerable challenge. It is expected that economic objectives will dominate the discussion for this controversial area of the province. From an economic perspective, the RAC will consider oil sands development scenarios modeled after the status quo (1.5 to 2 million barrels per day), mid-range growth (4 to 4 .5 million barrels per day) and high-end production (6 million barrels per day or more).

According to the ToR, these scenarios would place considerable pressure on freshwater resources, and the Athabasca River in particular. Under the status quo scenario water withdrawals from the Athabasca River are expected to increase from 4.4 m3 per second to 10.6 m3 per second by 2020. In the mid-rage scenario, water requirements are expected to increase to water requirements diverting up to 17 m3 assuming the construction of water storage facilities. In the high-end scenario, water withdrawals would increase to around 27 m3 per second by 2030. These diversions are particularly important during winter conditions when the river is at low flows and fish require a certain flow to live. The ToR points to the Lower Athabasca Water Management Framework as the mechanism expected to place limits on water withdrawals from oil sands operations.

Next steps

The Lower Athabasca Regional Advisory Council will consult with Albertans on both an initial vision for the area likely late in 2009 and a draft regional plan in 2010.

Sources

Canadian Boreal Initiative. 2009. Boreal Forest Conservation Framework (Accessed August 27th, 2009)

Cumulative Effects Management Association. June 2008. Terrestrial Ecosystem Management Framework for the Regional Municipality of Wood Buffalo (Accessed August 27th, 2009)

Government of Alberta. December 2008. Land-use Framework Final Report (Accessed August 29th, 2009)

Government of Alberta. December 2008. Terms of Reference for Developing the Lower Athabasca Regional Plan (Accessed August 25th, 2009)

Government of Alberta. 2009. Establishing Protected Areas (Accessed August 28th, 2009)

Steven Kennett. "Special Places 2000: Lessons from the Whaleback and the Castle" Resources No 63, 1998. (Accessed August 25th, 2009.)

Andy Marshall, "Many battles still ahead to protect special areas." Wild Lands Advocate 9(4): 1-3, August 200 (Accessed August 29th, 2009)