The impacts of having a Belly River dam
By Lethbridge Herald on February 19, 2026.
Editor,
The Belly River is one of 11 major rivers flowing east from the Rockies. It is the only one not impacted by a dam. But one is being planned. There are those who want more water, regardless of the cost or consequences. Beyond its natural beauty, the Eastern Slopes of the Rockies represents the main source of water for our region. It is fundamental to environmental integrity, our health and our economy.
As the intensity of our water demand increases with population and economic activity, the rivers have been the first to suffer. In the past number of years, water flow in the Oldman River Basin has not been enough to provide for river health. We have over-allocated the water available in the Oldman drainage. With anticipated declines in natural water flow due to poor forestry practices, vanishing glaciers, and changes in precipitation due to climate variations, we have to accept that there is a limit. And that we are at this limit.
The primary response to impending water scarcity (and the fear of economic hardship) is to increase water storage – to build dams. Unfortunately, dams don’t create more water. Dams simply shift the available water in time, perhaps capturing more in the spring to use later in the summer. It is a simplistic notion that ignores the real source of water – a stable climate and environmental integrity of the Eastern Slopes.
Building water storage is expensive and costs are largely borne by the public as a subsidy for food production. To justify this expense, it is important to know that a dam will provide the necessary value-added service. But we don’t know this, because we haven’t monitored and adequately modelled water flows for the potential range of climate-futures. In other words, we can spend a lot of money, do a lot of environmental damage, and achieve very little in terms of providing water to the people who need it, when they need it. Let alone leaving enough in the rivers to maintain healthy ecosystems.
Since the spectre of chronic drought has emerged, there have been 9 new and expanded dams proposed in southern Alberta. The Belly River is one of the few free-flowing rivers in Alberta and, as such, represents a relatively intact ecosystem providing opportunities for recreation and the appreciation of natural beauty.
The proposed Belly River reservoir would flood a long stretch of Belly River valley affecting extant cottonwood forests; a popular angling destination; spawning habitat for bull trout (a species-at-risk); the quality of the river for canoe and kayak enjoyment; and, perhaps, destroy sites significant to the Kainai First Nation.
Empirical studies of the Belly River suggest that water flows in the Belly River have been steadily declining for the past few decades due to overuse and the initial impacts of climate change. The data suggests that there will not be enough water in the river to fill and maintain reservoir storage levels on the Belly River. How much more of the natural environment are we willing to sacrifice for expanding irrigation?
If the retention of quality water is the goal, the most responsive, effective and cost-efficient approach is to preserve the integrity of the Eastern Slopes by better managing forestry practices and prohibiting industrial activities that pollute the headwaters (like coal mining).
The proposal to dam the Belly River is currently being considered through a preliminary feasibility study. The Southern Alberta Group for the Environment is expressing its concerns about this proposal to the public, our MLAs and to the Government of Alberta. We encourage you to do the same. The Belly River is too precious to dam.
Braum Barber
Lethbridge
13-12
Nine dams being planned!?! Iffy flow data and incomplete modelling!?! At a billion dollars per dam, this sounds like another corporate welfare boondoggle. Maybe Nathan should engage in a ‘thoughtful conversation’ about this.
Like the letter writer says: its time to talk about limits – to water, to intact ecosystems, and to taxpayer largesse.
“Maybe Nathan should engage in a ‘thoughtful conversation’ about this.”
Indeed. But, we must remember it must also be a nuanced conversation.
Thank you Mr. Barber for giving voice to the Belly River.
In view of the local, regional and global water crisis together with the global movement to give person-hood to rivers and river systems, it is imperative that those who are concerned about the Belly River and other river systems in this province also seek to demand the implementation of such legislation in this province.
https://www.osler.com/en/insights/updates/alberta-energy-regulator-finds-athabasca-river-basin-is-not-a-person/
Anthropocentric and eurocentric perspectives view the Natural world as a commodity to be bought and sold, as botanist and medical biochemist Diana Beresford-Kroeger states, “at the church of the holy dollar”.
Would we dam the Belly River and flood the cottonwoods if we understood them to be a life-giving mothers? Would be dam the Belly River if we understood we were destroying our brother, the Bull Trout? Would we dam the Belly River if a non-Indigenous sacred or cultural site of significance existed in the path of the dam?
At a time when major dams around the world are being deconstructed, what is motivating the Alberta government to build more? I think Diana Beresford-Kroeger has the answer.
https://e360.yale.edu/features/hydropower-dams-energy-decline
https://climatepromise.undp.org/news-and-stories/indigenous-knowledge-crucial-fight-against-climate-change-heres-why
https://treecanada.ca/article/bridging-indigenous-knowledge-and-environmental-stewardship/
The recent article on the Belly River is deeply misleading. The river is described as “one of the few free-flowing rivers in Alberta,” yet its flows are already heavily modified by irrigation diversions, small hydro intakes, and other water withdrawals. It is not untouched, and portraying it as pristine ignores decades of human impact.
The article also presents a dam as a threat to an otherwise intact ecosystem, but overlooks that a dam could assist with water management, storing high flows for use during dry periods and helping stabilize water availability. While environmental concerns are valid, the piece selectively frames the issue, omits the river’s existing modifications, and exaggerates the risk to wildlife and recreation.
Readers deserve a balanced discussion of both water management needs and environmental protection, not a one-sided alarmist narrative.
I respectfully ask you to carefully reread Mr. Barber’s letter with special attention to the section stating:
“Empirical studies of the Belly River suggest that water flows in the Belly River have been steadily declining for the past few decades due to overuse and the initial impacts of climate change.”
Does this statement not address the fact that the Belly River, as you state, “…[is] already heavily modified by irrigation diversions, small hydro intakes, and other water withdrawals”?
Moreover, Mr. Barber does not exaggerate any of the threats associated with building a dam on the river.
Acknowledging climate change and the global scarcity of water together with ignoring the ramifications of continued economic growth fails to meet your assessment as a “one-sided alarmist narrative”.
ABSTRACT
Clarke, K.D., Pratt, T.C, Randall, R.G, Scruton, D.A., and Smokorowski, K.E. 2008.
Validation of the flow management pathway: effects of altered flow on fish habitat and fishes downstream from a hydropower dam. Can. Tech. Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2784: vi + 111 p.
The Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) Habitat Management Program developed a series of Pathways of Effect diagrams that describe the cause-effect linkages between a development activity and a habitat impact. To ensure that the cause-effect linkages were science-based, DFO Science conducted a review of the science literature to validate the Flow Management Pathway. The review focused on whether flow management practices, including altering the frequency, amplitude, duration, timing and rate of change of flow, affected fishes downstream of barriers. Our review showed that the majority of the cause-effect linkages outlined in original Flow Management Pathway were supported in the literature, though a number of additional effects were identified as missing and subsequently added to a modified Pathway. Flow management practices can have direct (survival) and indirect (growth, reproduction, bioenergetics) impacts on fishes. Specific impacts on fishes resulting from flow alteration included changing total gas pressure, habitat access, stranding, water temperature, nutrient dynamics, bioenergetics and food supply. Flow management also affects physical habitat, altering erosion and deposition patterns resulting in changes in habitat structure and cover. The likely outcomes of flow management on fishes and their habitat were well-documented and fairly consistently represented in the literature, and the potential impacts were significant for many species.”
https://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2012/mpo-dfo/Fs97-6-2784-eng.pdf
Thank you, IMO, for your thoughtful and informed comments. And Sophie for emphasizing limits.
SAGE is a science-informed organization and a leading voice for a healthy and environmentally sustainable community.
Five years ago, the Government of Alberta in partnership with the Canada Infrastructure Bank and the Irrigating Alberta decided without public consultation to pursue nine dams. SAGE has worked to find out the details of the agreement, but they remain concealed. It appears that there are serious knowledge- (and value-) gaps in the decision-making process.
We invite the public to review the efforts SAGE has made: https://www.sage-environment.org/category/category-1/
With respect to ColeMinor’s comments, what would a thoughtful discussion on the notion of damming the Belly River entail?
Is there water enough to make this dam productive?What are the future impacts of extended droughts and loss of glaciers on water availability?What are the benefits of maintaining a largely extant ecosystem along the Belly River?What are the costs to the taxpayer, and who will benefit from a dam (should there be enough water to make storage value-added)?
The conversion of the natural environment to industrial activity is irreversible. In southern Alberta, there is little of our natural environment left, and it continues to be diminished as the pressures on land-use increase. A healthy environment is the foundation of our economy. There are limits. Dams don’t create water.
Three words that could be used to define the UCP government: without public consultation.
For Gerrymander Neudorf and MAGA Danielle, democracy is a problem to be solved. Real power has shifted to forums inaccessible to the public – quiet backroom meetings between ministers and corporate lobbyists, fundraising events, economic summits, or a good old fashioned bbq and a few brewskies.
Perhaps we could begin our ‘nuanced and thoughtful conversation’ with an election, with all these issues on the table?
Trouble is, the impact of a water shortage here in the Palliser Triangle, is appearing to still, be a ‘too late’ last minute realization thing, known globally as “Day Zero,” i.e. demand for water will exceed available supply. Perhaps it is already, too late, here.
Even Captain John Palliser stated early on that the population of this area should remain low, and that the area was more amenable to ranching than cultivation agriculture.
There’s nothing like learning the hard way eh?!