Crowsnest coal debate suffers from bullet-point arguments, says retired prof
By George Lee - THE MACLEOD GAZETTE - Local Journalism Initiative Reporter on November 20, 2024.
George Lee file photo -
The sun rises on one of the communities strung along Highway 3 that make up the Municipality of Crowsnest Pass. The Municipality is holding a non-binding vote on Nov. 25 to gauge support over the proposed Grassy Mountain coal mining project.The potential resurrection of Crowsnest Pass coal mining should never pit the environment against the economy, said a community member and retired professor in the lead-up to a Nov. 25 vote of electors.
Herald Kane said he too often sees economic advantages like corporate investment, high-paying jobs and diversification of the municipal taxbase lined up against environmental concerns like watershed supply and quality, increased air particulate and the blockage of mountain wildlife corridors.
But the implications of mining Grassy Mountain are more momentous than side-by-side bullet points can explain, said Kane, a retired San Diego City College professor in organic chemistry who divides his time between the community of his childhood and the U.S.
“This might be the most important issue that’s come up for us in the past 50 or 60 years,” said Kane, a member of the Crowsnest Conservation Society. “That being the case, you try to learn about it as much as you can.”
Northback Holdings Corporation has reignited its Grassy Mountain project on the Eastern Slopes within an historic coal mining belt that runs through southwestern Alberta and southeastern B.C. But the subsidiary of Australia’s Hancock Prospecting Pty Ltd faces renewed regulatory scrutiny and a legal challenge in a once-rejected quest to mine metallurgical coal there.
Those in favour do, indeed, point to economic benefits. But they also emphasize that polluting their community and destroying the environment are not in anyone’s interests – the company included.
They say that technology and regulations have come a long way since the early days of mining in Crowsnest Pass and Elk Valley, and that replacing coal mining with tourism isn’t working out.
Said Troy Linderman of Citizens Supportive of Crowsnest Coal: “It’s beautiful. We (he and wife Carmen) grew up here and our children grew up here. They enjoy the outdoors and the rivers, and so have we our entire lives. However, we’ve been waiting 50-something years for tourism to take off, and we’re still waiting.”
Northback is a corporate player in an Eastern Slopes controversy that dates from, at least, the days of the Progressive Conservative government under Peter Lougheed. A Coal Development Policy for Alberta, created in 1976, included four categories for coal exploration and development.
Although Grassy Mountain is widely considered a sensitive site, the province has confirmed that it lies within a category where coal mining “may be permitted under appropriate control,” as the policy puts it.
Surface, underground or in-situ operations on Category 4 lands “may be considered subject to proper assurances respecting protection of the environment and reclamation of disturbed lands,” the policy says.
The UCP government rescinded the policy, reinstituted it and then, through a ministerial order, paused most Eastern Slopes applications.
Northback’s newest applications were allowed to proceed, however, because the Alberta Energy Regulator and the province classify them as part of an “advanced project.” The AER applications seek approval to explore for coal, as well as divert water and drill in the process.
The Alberta Court of Appeal granted leave to appeal in August to the Municipal District of Ranchland over AER’s acceptance of the applications. The appeal challenges the advanced designation, given that an original version of the proposal, begun in 2015, failed to earn federal and provincial approval.
AER is following the usual practice of regulatory bodies to proceed unless ordered to stop, setting hearing dates in December and January.
The Municipality of Crowsnest Pass decided to gauge support for the proposal, even though the mine would be just beyond its northern boundary in Ranchland. The Nov. 25, non-binding vote asks: “Do you support the development and operations of the metallurgical coal mine at Grassy Mountain?”
Kane said: “My position with Northback is I’m here to gather and absorb information, and I’m not doing it so that I can undermine you or attack you with the information you give me. I really want to know.”
He added: “I’m not against coal mining on Grassy Mountain. I’m against coal mining on Grassy Mountain – unless.”
It’s that “unless” part that Kane has been investigating by going on company tours of the site, attending open houses, reading up on environmental issues and studies, and talking to project supporters and proponents.
In a prepared statement, Northback said the project will be “operated in a way that meets all the stringent federal and provincial environmental regulations for mining.”
The statement continued: “This project will employ modern, responsible mining techniques that differ from historical practices, particularly in the way we can manage and mitigate selenium into waterways.
“Northback respects that water is an essential element we all use and need to protect, which is why we are committed to redesigning the project in a new application to address these important environmental concerns.”
Mining began in neighbouring Elk Valley in B.C. in 1898, when running water through broken rocks into waterways was considered a good filtering system. But by doing so, mining companies were unwittingly increasing the release of selenium and creating a buildup in the Elk River that wasn’t discovered until a century later.
As for Crowsnest Pass, its first coal mine opened in 1900 and the last mine closed 83 years later.
Speaking to The Macleod Gazette in an earlier interview, Northback communications leader Rina Blacklaws said newer mines are “extremely effective in managing selenium.” Systems like active water treatment plants, saturated backfill zones and phytoremediation on wetlands are often incorporated now.
Phytoremediation is a decontamination process using soil microbes and plants to reduce contaminant concentration. A saturated backfill zone involves storing water-saturated rock and feeding it carbon to create a chemical reaction that may reduce selenium in water.
Elk Valley Resources is managing selenium release and contamination through a plan approved by the B.C. government. The plan is designed to mitigate the impact of mining on water quality while ensuring sustainable operations.
Kane so far likes what he sees on the B.C. side. “I’m interested and encouraged by progress made on actual remedial achievements regarding selenium in surface water. Having said that, I’m not totally convinced. But I’m reading reports that are encouraging.”
He added that he appreciates that “a huge amount of money, energy and time” is going into the Elk Valley approach.
Kane’s problem on the Crowsnest side is that he can’t get enough detail to make a fully informed decision. “That’s part of what’s not developed yet: their actual plan. They don’t have it yet. That’s been somewhat frustrating.”
Little mention is made of air particulate or the possible blocking of wildlife movement beside the Livingstone Range, he said. Mines and other developments can end up isolating animals like elk and grizzly bears on so-called islands, threatening species survival.
But Northback said that its actual mining application will include the kind of detail Kane is after. The first hurdle is the current set of three applications, all related to exploration.
In the earlier interview with The Gazette, Blacklaws said the current site is an unreclaimed mess from the last operating mine there. So progressive remediation will restore biodiversity.
The site is “incapable of supporting recreation, wildlife habitat, the vegetation that should be there, because it’s been formerly mined and just left like that,” Blacklaws said. “There’s old equipment and debris still scattered throughout the site. So in reclaiming it, we can return the land to a state that can be used once again to support diverse ecosystems and be used by future generations.”
Blacklaws was cautious not to equate the current applications or next steps with the version of the proposal rejected in 2021. However, she said that the effect on the watershed isn’t as massive as often portrayed.
In the old application, the annual water allocation was pegged at 600,000 cubic metres. “Someone started this tagline that coal is a thirsty business. Well, 600,000 cubic metres is the equivalent to what three to four irrigated quarter sections of agricultural land require,” she said.
Kane said water is particularly critical in the area, because of role it plays in the South Saskatchewan Watershed, which supports water use throughout southern Alberta. The system doesn’t have huge ice packs, tall mountains, deep valleys and vast tracts of thick vegetation to draw its supply from, he said.
Northback’s current applications with the Alberta Energy Regulator cover exploring for coal, as well as diverting water and drilling in the process.
AER is following the usual practice of regulatory bodies to proceed unless they’re ordered to stop, setting hearing dates in December and January.
A joint review panel of AER and the Federal Impact Assessment Agency published in June 2021 that the proposal was not in the public interest. Benga Mining Ltd., as the Hancock proponent was then called, had applied for an open-pit mine to produce up to 4.5 million tonnes of metallurgical coal over about 23 years.
Kane, meanwhile, is frustrated that he may not be able to vote Nov. 25, because of the time he spends away from the municipality. Voters in plebiscites and elections in Alberta must live where they vote.
After retiring, Kane returned to the Crowsnest community of Hillcrest. He, other part-timers and newcomers deserve a say, he said.
“Why did I come back here? Because the mountains were as they were when I was a child, when I used to talk to them and lie at their sides and play in their fields and climb in their trees. That’s why my feet are really planted at this point on the planet,” said Kane.
He estimated about 1,500 people who he thinks deserve to vote can’t do so, even though they own a home or even a trailer spot that they visit often. “Maybe they even come up here every weekend and tour around,” he said. “They’re all committed to the Crowsnest Pass for the same reason: it’s beautiful and by and large pristine.”
Who can vote is out of the municipality’s hands, however, because provincial legislation creates the rules. Statistics Canada in 2021 placed the voting population of the Municipality of Crowsnest Pass at about 4,850.
Kane said he understands the troubles young families have. But things aren’t as bad as they’re made out to be.
“Yes, our working-class people are screwed as always. There’s no rentals for them. They can’t actually buy,” he said.
But assessment growth tops many southern Alberta municipalities, and the transition to a tourism economy is happening.
“Lots of people are moving here,” Kane said. “It’s not because there’s mining here. They come here because it’s beautiful. They come here to fish on the weekend. They want to take their kids out on the trail.”
50-49
I don’t know why the Crowsnest Pass is wasting money on a plebicite. Just have the UCP government change the definition of mountain top removal of coal as ‘accelerated erosion’, and make selenium an ‘essential mineral for plant growth and human thriving.’
After all, we won’t discover the impacts until well after this government becomes a footnote in history.
This referendum is all “smoke and mirrors”. The mine IS NOT in the municipal district of the CNP.
‘accelerated erosion’ will finally get those stupid peaks out of the way so’s we can see the clear blue sky better.
not sure what all the fuss about selenium is, either. good enough for multivitamins, good enough for the masses.