Hi all.

It seems that the table turned on Saturday. Now that we’ve spent the past several months working hard to comply with what the premier said were the rules and criteria for her to take the WNC petition to referendum along with the other 9 or 10 issues on the ballot, it’s as though we have been redacted. If you haven’t seen it on social media or elsewhere, here’s what Corb Lund and the team just delivered today.

“Thousands of Albertans spent weeks collecting signatures in snow, sleet, rain, and occasional sunshine; and thanks to that grit and determination, we delivered more than 200,000 signatures to Elections Alberta last week to protect the water we drink.

You folks did an amazing job and I’ll be proud for the rest of my life to have fought that battle with you. Massive thank you to our thousands of intrepid canvassers. You guys really delivered and should be very proud of your work.

Danielle Smith gave us her word back in February:
“Whether it’s the independence petition or the coal petition, if they get the requisite number of signatures, our intention would be to put those on the ballot at the same time.” [https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/corb-lund-citizen-petition-coal-9.7101200]

On Saturday she broke that promise, and is doing everything she can to keep Water Not Coal from being on the referendum ballot in October.

I think it’s disgusting to put out a challenge to Albertans, watch them break their backs and devote thousands of hours to achieve their goal, then pull the rug out from under us. It is despicable and dishonest, and I’m not going to stand by and let her get away with this without a very big fight.

The fact is, Smith can put Water Not Coal on the ballot herself via ‘Order in Council,’ just like she said she would in February, just like she did with all 10 other questions that are currently on the ballot.

She can do it, but she’s choosing not to. She’s treating Water Not Coal differently, because she thinks she can.

But we’re fighting back. Our mountains and water are too important to trust to politicians who have clearly forgotten who they work for. (Hint: They work for us, for Albertans, not an Australian billionaire, or profit-driven coal companies.)

We’re ramping up for a battle.

Here are 3 things you can do to help today:

1. Re-Commit to the Rockies and clean water. We’re building a team for this next phase and want your help. If you want to be part of our growing ground team of volunteers, let us know.

https://next.waternotcoal.ca

2. Get loud. Post to social media and have your say in the comments section. Tell her to keep her word, and demand Water Not Coal’s question be added verbatim, just as it appears on the petition sheets, to the October 19 ballot. Tag your friends, and tag your MLA.

3. Consider helping us out financially. Times are tight, but if you can help fund the fight back campaign, please consider make a donation to Water Not Coal. Even $50 helps. We have been very responsible in allocating the donations we receive to achieve maximum success and will continue to do so, you have our word. Your support at this critical time could mean the difference between getting on the ballot and getting lost in the legislative calendar.

https://secure.waternotcoal.ca

Thanks again for everyone’s support. I had no illusions this would be over quickly but I didn’t expect the Premier to behave so dishonourably, this quickly. We are not letting go of this after all our work.”

Sincerely,

Corb Lund and the Water Not Coal Team

At our last ceremony held at Bill English’s residence on the Oldman River, and as we were gathered at the water’s edge visiting and waiting for Elder Morris Little Wolf to begin, we were suddenly greeted by the whoop’s and war cries of the Buffalo Runners who had arrived and were looking at us from the cliff above. I tell you…..that was moving!

With water taken from the very upper headwaters of the Oldman and contained in a buffalo horn, the Buffalo Runners have been moving downstream from there in relay sequence. Some are on foot along the river, handing off to a paddler who carries the horn in a kayak continuing downstream for another hand off to runners again.

This is clearly an exercise in dedication, stamina, and fortitude representing the significance and importance of the precious resource of our water and the land, these basic elements of life which we are graced to have shared with us by the Piikani Nation and Blackfoot Confederacy.

Moving on to this coming Saturday, June 20th at 10:00 AM, in harmony with the summer solstice of the following day, the final prayer ceremony of the season will take place in Lethbridge at Fort Whoop-Up on the bank of the Oldman River. The buffalo horn will arrive there carried by the runners.

Following the ceremony everyone is invited and encouraged to move up into town for a gathering at the Trianon Gallery which is currently featuring an exhibition celebrating Water. This is a beautiful compliment to these ongoing ceremonies and well worth seeing.

The gallery is located at 104 - 5th St. S., on the corner facing Galt Gardens park and opposite Park Place Mall. The gallery is upstairs above the TARO Noodle House. The entry is the dark door to the left of the restaurant entrance. See photos below:

We hope that you are able to attend. Happy Solstice and Happy Summer!!

A grader had already ripped up a linear section of the native grassland on the Antelope Creek Ranch when Bob, the Ranch Manager, corralled the operator and asked what he was doing. “Building a new lease road to a proposed well site,” was the answer. When asked for the letter of authorization, the operator shrugged and replied, “I don’t know anything about the paper work. I just get paid for building roads.”

After Bob called me, I determined the company hadn’t even applied for the authorization, let alone been given the go ahead for construction. The Antelope Creek Ranch is a working ranch of about ten sections, set up initially to integrate and demonstrate ways of conserving native prairie and its biodiversity with livestock grazing and petroleum development. Building another road across the grassland, especially without permission, and adding to an already cumulative weight of development, did not fit with conservation objectives.

I ordered the company to cease and desist on road construction. I also pointed out that there would be no more petroleum development on the ranch, given their failure to adhere to the rules. The company wasn’t aware I didn’t have authority to do either.

You would have thought the energy security of the free world was at risk, given the company response. Since my role was biodiversity conservation, not energy development, I remained unmoved by the tirade. I suggested they first re-read the conservation plan for the ranch, of which they were a signatory, and then we might talk.

A meeting was arranged in their corporate headquarters in Calgary, an imposing downtown skyscraper. I was asked to wait, a standard intimidation technique. I browsed the oil patch magazines, thoughtfully arrayed on a table. One article caught my eye. I took the magazine into the boardroom, a cavernous affair with an immense oval table surrounded by leather chairs. Art, depicting oil derricks and other petroleum related works set against scenes of tranquil and wild landscapes, surrounded the room.

Every chair was filled but one, with grim-faced executives. It was to be the inquisition of the lone biologist. I began by quickly reiterating the goals and objectives of the ranch, especially the integration of petroleum activity with wildlife conservation. I then opened the magazine and asked if I could read them a corporate perspective on how one oil company was responding to those challenges.

I don’t remember precisely how the piece was worded but it included references to environmental sustainability, of the necessity to plan accordingly, and to commitments for reclamation and restoration. It talked about working cooperatively with local communities and groups, the corporate responsibilities to adhere to government policy and regulations, and to going the extra mile to be seen as engaged and good corporate citizens wherever they worked.

I asked them if they agreed with this corporate prospectus. All nodded. I then asked them whether they knew which company was referred to in the article. None did.

I pointed out the article referenced their company, their corporate objectives, their corporate commitments, and their corporate philosophy. The inquisition was turned on its head and there was much coughing, sputtering, and twisting in leather chairs. Their corporate actions on the Antelope Creek Ranch were 180˚ from where their stated philosophy was located.

This isn’t an anomaly, a one-off from one company, an excuse lower levels didn’t get the “memo.” No, this is corporate spin to cover what is in practice, a lie. Fine words, meant to soothe, to placate, and to disguise from true intents, are epidemic.

The Alberta Forests Products Association, the lobby group for the timber industry, says their environmental mandate is: “Healthy forests help maintain a healthy environment, and we make sure the forest industry does too. The health of trees, plants, animals, air, water and soils—today and in the future—drives what our industry does and how we do it.”

One of the companies active in the Eastern Slopes provided this response: “We agree that understanding cumulative disturbance across ownerships is important and West Fraser will continue to utilize best management practices, low risk watercourse crossings and temporary roads to minimize our footprint.”

Actions speak louder than words and in an assessment of logging practices in the upper Oldman watershed, the Alberta Wilderness Association documented a complete failure on the part of West Fraser to “maintain a healthy environment,” “use of best management practices,” and to employ “low risk water crossings.”

Riparian buffers were logged over, erosion protection at stream crossings was generally either missing, poorly installed, or not maintained. Subsequent monitoring showed excessive erosion and sediment delivery from logging roads to streams containing threatened cutthroat trout and bull trout.

The findings of 667 failures to adhere to even the minimal timber harvest operating ground rules, the Fisheries Act and the Species At Risk Act would suggest the reality on the ground is a complete swap for the rhetoric of sustainable logging practices and protection of other forest values like species at risk trout.

Given the evidence, what drives the logging industry isn’t the narrative of a healthy environment, but a profit-driven one, to the exclusion of most of the essential ecological checks and balances to logging activity.

The Coal Association of Canada says, “Canadian coal operates under the world’s strictest environmental regulations.” Given the evidence that every open-pit coal mine in Alberta has had, and many continue to have acute, chronic, and catastrophic failures that impact water quality and biodiversity, this might suggest either the regulations and standards are hardly strict, hardly enforceable, or hardly enforced.

Hitchens’s razor is a general rule for rejecting certain claims of knowledge. It states: “What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.” No facts are in place that detail the various environmental regulations on a worldwide basis as an opportunity to test the assumption Canada’s (or Alberta’s) regulations are superior. Nor does it offer evidence that regulations are uniformly followed.

Since the Coal Association, as the lobby group for coal interests, constantly lobbies both provincial and federal governments on reducing the environmental regulatory “burden,” one has to take the statement on operating “under the world’s strictest environmental regulations” with more than a pinch of salt.

In the case of coal mining, the evidence of environmental failures is voluminous, unequivocal, and compelling. The impacts of legacy coal mines, in terms of a constant release of a chemical stew of contaminants into receiving waters, selenium especially, is not a credible endorsement for the industry or its claims of environmental excellence.

It is as if corporate speak is designed to paint a picture that is a lie, make it a big lie, and tell it frequently enough so it will be believed by some, especially politicians who continue to support unsustainable logging, mining, and petroleum extraction practices.

The truth is painful, unpalatable, and politically dangerous, at least in the short term. In contrast lying is profitable (at least to some) and allows the powerful to set the narrative. To the lazy and the uninformed these lies seem practical and easy, even beneficial. But as José N. Harris, an American author, reflected, “Lies only strengthen our defects. They don’t teach anything, help anything, fix anything or cure anything. Nor do they develop one’s character, one’s mind, one’s heart or one’s soul.” That works at a corporate level as well as at a personal one.

When many understand they are being lied to, they start to look under the surface and find the cracks in corporate speak. If the social license to operate is lost, credibility and trust fly. The regulatory one may be soon to follow. Then corporate aspirations diminish.

Children are taught that the ethical principle is to tell the truth at all times. Yet in politics and business it seems this is a common transgression. Some lies are made in apparent error, because of failures to investigate all the evidence. But lies by intention, when the truth is known and the facts are indisputable, should be considered the most serious of crimes.

When Jack Ward Thomas, an eminent wildlife biologist, took over the helm of the US Forest Service, he sent a short, but pointed memo out to all staff. It read, “Tell the truth and obey the law.” Imagine if this was to be the new corporate mantra.

Lorne Fitch is a Professional Biologist, a retired Fish and Wildlife Biologist and a former Adjunct Professor with the University of Calgary. He is the author of Streams of Consequence, Travels Up the Creek, and Conservation Confidential.

Corb suspects government will exclude Australian Grassy Mountain in referendum question.

“I think this whole project is crooked. It doesn’t make any sense economically or environmentally”, Corb tells CTV.

View CTV’s Alberta Prime Time . . .

Subscribe now

CBC: “Musician and rancher Corb Lund says more than 200,000 Albertans signed his petition demanding the province prohibit all coal mining and exploration in the Eastern Slopes of the Rocky Mountains, including the Grassy Mountain and Blackstone projects.

“Lund arrived at Elections Alberta’s head office in Edmonton Wednesday afternoon in a pickup truck pulling a trailer with black plastic bins with blue lids full of signed petitions.”

Read full CBC News report . . .

Subscribe now

This coming Saturday, June 13th, at 10:00 AM we will be engaging once again with our Piikani brothers and sisters in the 3rd ceremony, the Buffalo Crossing Ceremony, at Bill English’s place on the Piikani reserve. Below are two directional maps, one oriented from Ft. Macleod, the other from Pincher Creek.

To spare any confusion at crossroads there will be blue arrows indicating direction. Taking note of the written distances on each leg of the route should be of help as well.

Once again, we’re hoping you can attend.

From Ft. Macleod:

Hwy 2 north to Hwy 785 heading towards Head Smashed In Buffalo Jump. Continue past to Range Rd. 280 and follow blue arrow signs from there to arrive at the Buffalo Crossing Ceremony location.

From Pincher Creek:

Hwy 3 east to Hwy 785. Continue east then north on 785 to Township Rd. 82 and follow blue signs from there to ceremony location.

See you there!

It was a big risk, and he won it.

Musician Corb Lund stood up for Alberta against Australian greed and Danielle Smith complicity. He won. They lost.

Let’s see whether the Smith regime will have the moral integrity to obey its own law and put the coal issue to the legislature for a vote or to the people directly in a referendum alongside her separatism question.

Calgary Herald

CTV Lethbridge

CBC/The Canadian Press

Subscribe now

Read Kennedy Halvorson’s full article in Nature Alberta Magazine . . .

Subscribe now

Hi all.

If you’re heading to or just passing through Pincher Creek on Wednesday, June 3rd, there will be canvassers for the Water Not Coal petition collecting signatures outside the Pincher Creek Municipal Library from 10 am - 5:30ish. If you haven’t yet signed please do so soon and please be sure to have proof of address (street address, legal land description on power bill, etc.) with you because a post office box number is not acceptable.

We’re in the home stretch with this thing and every signature matters. Tell your friends and family. SPREAD THE WORD! and Thank You!!

With a change that has likely been in discussions for some time, New Zealand is intent on moving forward with transitioning from coal fired furnaces to electric arc steel production. One more move which will lessen the “demand” for coal and presumably lower its sale value and projected revenues spouted about by proponents.

Thank you to Chris Spearman for sharing this article which you can enjoy reading here.

When in Edmonton this summer and you’re feeling for ice cream, please visit Made by Marcus and say thank you for supporting the Water Not Coal campaign.

Photo courtesy of Vic Bergman who is currently enjoying the ice cream.

We apologize for any confusion.

To: Crowsnest Headwaters Substack followers

There was a pro-Coal article on the May 16, 2026 Opinion page of the Calgary Herald, entitled: Many Crowsnest Pass residents back the coal mine in their backyard, by Carmen Linderman, who is president of Citizens Supportive of Crowsnest Coal. Linderman provides a well-written article in favour of the proposed coal mine promoted by Northback Holdings, a coal mining company owned by the Australian billionaire Gina Rinehart.

I do however disagree with Linderman’s first point where he notes that the Municipal District (MD) of Crowsnest Pass voted 72% in favour of the Northback proposed mine at Grassy Mountain. What Linderman did not include, though, is that the proposed mine would not be situated in the Municipality of Crowsnest Pass; in actual fact, it is located mostly outside of their municipality, in the MD of Ranchlands. It is easier to vote in favour of a potentially polluting industrial project if it’s not in your own municipality - and the MD of Ranchland has come out opposed to the proposed mine. One more point in this regard – there are two creeks draining from the proposed open-pit Grassy Mountain mining site, namely Blairmore Creek, which discharges into the Crowsnest River at Blairmore, and Gold Creek still further to the east. And so there is a significant geographic part of the MD of Crowsnest Pass that is upstream, upwind of any air and water impacts from the proposed mine. Again, when negative impacts occur downstream, downwind of where one lives, it does make it easier to be pro-coal.

A second point Linderman made: “We voted for an economic boost – an anchor industry and the jobs that come with it.” I get that, good-paying jobs, year-round employment, perhaps new schools and hospitals, and roads repaved are activities we all want in our communities. But let’s listen to communities further downstream in the same watershed, for example, in the city of Lethbridge. The Calgary Herald newspaper of March 1, 2025, had the following headline: “Lethbridge council confirms it opposes coal mine projects”. In the article, the Mayor and City Council express concern about impacts, namely from selenium on the southern Alberta economy, specifically on the extensive irrigation systems downstream, where contaminated water from mine effluent, could impact the irrigation water and “the reputation of our agri-food processing hubs”. These city residents are the downstream recipients of any new Grassy Mountain coal mine, and in their opinion, it’s not worth the risk. The agriculture industry is sustainable, extremely high value, provides many jobs, and will continue for the next 100 years and beyond, whereas a new or reopened coal mine in the Crowsnest Pass will exist for 25-35 years, followed by perhaps 50-100 years of polluted waterways and toxic airborne dust. If I lived in the Oldman watershed, I would favour the argument from the City of Lethbridge. As well, if majority opinion should rule (another point that Linderman makes), then, very likely, based on past voting results, the Grassy Mountain proposed mine would be voted down by most of the residents in the Oldman basin. Let all the residents in the affected basin decide!

Regarding potential environmental impacts, Linderman suggests we can rely on the AER (Alberta Energy Regulator) oversight of the Northback coal mine application, since “they employ subject matter experts who have studied these projects for years”. This sounds very reasonable. In fact, Linderman must know this: the AER and the federal Ministry of Environment and Climate Change rejected an application for a coal mine at Grassy Mountain in 2021 as it was considered too risky from an environmental perspective. It is the currently UCP government that is now attempting to get around the results of the environmental review. The Alberta Energy Regulator with “all it’s subject matter experts” indeed rejected the Grassy Mountain coal mine application.

I would suggest that one also look to the provincial government watershed scientists for advice. Alberta Environment and Protected Areas is blessed with the presence of excellent scientists who have taken field samples, assessed, and reported on the impacts of coal mines on Alberta rivers in the Oldman, Red Deer, North Saskatchewan, and Athabasca basins. Their role is to focus on the science, just the science, no need to attempt to balance the environment and industry, no need to consider political priorities. Starting with Richard Casey in the 1990s, and through the work of Drs. Cooke, Emmerton, Drevnick, Donahue, and Kerr (2020-2025) you can find their methods and conclusions reported in readily available international peer-reviewed journals. Our provincial Environment department has done a stellar job with these scientific studies and reporting. They have shown, using real data, that Alberta’s coal mines are negatively impacted our waterways, with selenium being the key toxic pollutant. Selenium is an essential element for humans and other animals, but at higher concentrations it is toxic to fish, terrestrial wildlife, farm and range animals, and to humans. The Elk River through Fernie, BC, for example, is too contaminated with selenium for use as a potable water supply due to upstream coal mining activity. This is real, and this impacts humans. Again, I suggest we listen to the Government of Alberta (GOA) scientists; they have been hired by GOA to provide this clear, unbiased knowledge. Alas, they are currently not allowed to speak publicly about what they have written, the reason unknown. But their reports speak for themselves with their final conclusions being: “there are negative impacts, and there will be more if new coal mines are approved” (Cooke et al, 2025). Selenium values in many of the coal mine affected lakes and streams that they sampled were well above the provincial guidelines for protection of aquatic life. They are reporting real data, real impacts, proven impacts on aquatic organisms and potential downstream impacts from range cattle to human consumption.

As well as GOA scientists working for the provincial Department of the Environment, one can refer to the work and reporting from Dr. Ross McKenzie, a former agronomy research scientist with the provincial Department of Agriculture. McKenzie worked out of the GOA Alberta Agriculture office in Lethbridge for 38 years. His opinions are expressed in his recent articles published in the newsletter, Grainviews (January 22 and March 31, 2025). In his professional opinion, selenium could be an issue for irrigation farmers in southern Alberta and further downstream into southern Saskatchewan. According to McKenzie, selenium accumulates in irrigated soil and can be taken up by crops, which selectively store it in seeds rather than in leaves or stems. McKenzie’s concern is potentially contaminated crops, contaminated feed stock for livestock and contaminated livestock going to market. As well, rangelands downwind of the proposed Grassy Mountain mine would likely also be affected by fugitive coal dust in an area of the province well known for high velocity chinook winds.

A final point that Linderman makes is that coal mines today use treatment methods designed to meet guidelines that protect fish, downstream water users, and people who drink the water. I respectfully disagree. The new treatment methods can, in laboratory settings and controlled field trials, remove 95-99 percent of selenium, which is impressive. But the end results are still above the environmental guidelines. My understanding here is based on what I read in pro-Coal literature. For example, in a March 25, 2025, Technical Memorandum from an Ontario-based consulting firm, the report states that a mine in northeast BC (Conuma Brule Mine) is removing 94% of selenium from a waste stream, reducing it from 200 micrograms per litre to 20 micrograms per litre. This is impressive, but the BC guideline for protection of aquatic life (for fish species, etc.) is 1 microgram per litre and for source drinking water, 10 micrograms per litre. The treatment technologies are improving, but they are still not good enough. The same article states that “selection of appropriate treatment methods depends on criteria such as cost, climate conditions, resource availability, and energy requirements.” Note that the first item in the sentence is the issue of cost. Just because there are more effective treatment technologies, some may be cost-prohibitive and therefore a company such as Northback may protest a requirement to use these best available technologies (economically unviable) and instead use inferior methods that would cost less and, alas, pollute more.

This is a difficult issue with many contrasting, often impassioned opinions, all of which should be respected. Linderman provided a very reasonable opinion based on his living in the Crowsnest Pass and the beneficial employment a new mine would provide. Lethbridge City Council expresses the opposite opinion – do not kill the agricultural industry in southern Alberta, which, in contrast to the proposed Northback mine, is much larger and far more sustainable than coal. I hope that the “Water not Coal” initiative, led by singer Corb Lund, is successful in obtaining sufficient signatures by June 10th to motivate the current UCP government to include this in its decision-making and solicit feedback; let the people of Alberta decide.

The Temptations of the Sirens of Economic Song

Lorne Fitch, P. Biol.

One of the virtues of a liberal education is being exposed to the thoughts and messages of classical literature. Much has parallels with our modern world and lessons for it.

In The Odyssey, 24 books of ancient Greek literature attributed to Homer, ten years after the Achaean Greeks won the Trojan War, Ulysses, king of Ithaca, slowly returned home from Troy. The voyage home was, indeed epic by any definition.

A translated passage from book 12 of The Odyssey sees the hero Ulysses warn his men of an impending challenge:

She [Circe] said we must avoid the voices of the otherworldly Sirens; steer past their flowering meadow. And she says that I alone should hear their singing. Bind me, to keep me upright at the mast, wound round with rope. If I beseech you and command to set me free, you must increase my bonds and chain even tighter.

The Sirens were creatures often depicted as human-animal chimeras, half-woman, half-bird. They lured sailors to the rocky cliffs of their island home with beguiling voices which no man was able to resist. The Sirens and Ulysses is a large oil painting by the English artist William Etty, first exhibited in 1837, which provides a sense of the scene Homer created for Ulysses and his sailors.

On his decade-long journey home to Ithaca from the Trojan Wars, Ulysses steered past the island of the Sirens. On the advice of Circe, a lesser god and enchantress, he ordered his men to plug their ears with beeswax and tie him tightly with rope to the ship’s mast before they rowed the vessel with vigour past the island to escape.

On hearing the Sirens’ “honeyed song,” he asked his men to loosen the rope. Even mighty Ulysses could not resist their call—but his comrades wisely tightened his bonds even more. When they had passed the island and were beyond the Sirens’ call, the sailors removed the wax from their ears and untied their leader.

Homer’s epic story has a metaphoric message for us today. Just as the Sirens were beguiling temptresses with a song hard to resist, so too are the prevailing economic messages from governments and corporations. The verse and the chorus are about getting bigger, faster, with more jobs and higher government revenues. There is a palpable obsession about growing the economy, boosting the economy, diversifying the economy, and mostly kowtowing to the economy by liquidating more of our natural resources. We are told we have to, otherwise the country will wither and die. It’s an approach of damn the costs, full speed ahead.

It’s a focus on becoming rich (or richer) by increasing our standard of living (which will not be shared equitably across the board). Clearly the rich have money, but the wealthy have intact, resilient ecosystems, the full suite of ecological goods and services, and nurturing, caring communities. To get the former, you have to sacrifice much of the latter.

Blowing the tops off mountains to extract coal has the potential to make someone richer, but the costs, the liabilities, especially borne by those downstream and downwind aren’t reconciled in the economic song. Industrial-strength clear-cut logging seems very profitable, especially when companies dodge the rules of environmental protection, but downstream effects create sour notes. Plowing up more native grassland and irrigating it to plant potatoes to make into fries and chips is lucrative, but it’s a swan song for prairie rivers.

The financial benefits of floating in a sea of oil and gas has made us the envy of others, but we need to sing the blues over the impacts and costs of exacerbating climate change. Dealing with the liabilities seems a can kicked down the road, like the toxic ponds of the tar sands, where the most innovative solution seems to be to drain them into the Athabasca River.

It’s a pile-on of cumulative effects, ecological thresholds left behind in the dust of rapid development, wild species missing in action, irreconcilable environmental damage, and the sense from the lyrics of the economic song that all was good and necessary. Singers croon that what we have seen is only the beginning.

Where in the balance sheets of today’s economic Sirens are recorded the costs of getting rich? What are the costs of increased frequency and intensity of floods, drought, wildfires, heat domes, and other wicked weather linked to economic development? Or the biodiversity losses, water and air quality declines, and reduced landscape resilience to the changes brought on by getting rich?

Maybe plugging our ears with beeswax from the hype or tying ourselves to the mast of skepticism about the Sirens’ economic song would be wise to avoid blind surrender and submission. At least until we are past the island of tempting entrapments and on to songs of vision, restraint, and stewardship.

Thanks Homer, for the warning some 2800 years ago.

Lorne Fitch is a Professional Biologist, a retired Fish and Wildlife Biologist and a former Adjunct Professor with the University of Calgary. He is the author of Streams of Consequence, Travels Up the Creek, and Conservation Confidential.

Hi all.

This is a terrific and very enlightening article from the Colorado based High Country News. In our fight to save and preserve the integrity of our Eastern Slopes, in large part for the necessity of our water, this writing provides an epiphany of sorts to the actual sanctity of water and it’s deeper interconnectedness to the broader spectrum of life.

Thank you to David McIntyre for sharing this with Crowsnest Headwaters. I hope you all can take the time to read this powerful view on why “Water is Life”.

The link to the article is here.

Here’s Lorne with a link to that paper and his own take on it.

“Among many things the move on part of both governments to speed up approvals for projects has me spooked, especially related to coal mines. Here’s the discussion paper for the federal initiative. It seems like they would like input, so it might be good to make people aware of this and the opportunity to comment.”

Speed Kills—Even on Major Projects Approvals

Lorne Fitch, P. Biol.

Fast food, fast highways, fast project approvals. Everyone is in a rush these days. All introduce greater risk, more danger, and a sense there isn’t time to thoughtfully assess all of the implications of speed versus caution.

Bill 30, the Alberta government’s Expedited 120-Day Approval Act and the federal government’s “Getting Major Projects Built in Canada” initiative are examples of this pell-mell rush to get projects approved fast. There is a cost to this speed which is rarely factored into the hype and sales pitch of economic development.

The usual rationale is approvals take too long, the “red tape” is too constricting, and opportunity will flee to less regimented jurisdictions if governments don’t acquiesce and accede to reducing the regulatory burden.

Surely there is no conflict between corporate interests and the public good? Well, both the provincial and federal governments have been subject to a concerted whispering campaign that time is money, long-range planning for environmental assessment is overly onerous, regulations are too constraining, and if business doesn’t get a signal of speedy approvals the economy will surely crater. This all seems so compelling until one looks for the evidence.

There is no credible evidence that regulatory processes like environmental assessments are an obstacle for business, that the process currently takes too long, or in any way constrains economic development. On the contrary, it is in the public interest to ensure projects actually meet requirements for protection of water quality, landscape integrity, human health, biodiversity, and related conventions signed by governments.

The process also is a sober test of whether projects risk a bailout from the public purse because of bad business decisions or inadequate environmental restoration or reclamation.

One of the axioms of speed is “There’s never time to do it right, but there’s always time to do it over.” Except, many times we don’t get to do it over, especially when the pace of development zeal leaves an unfortunate legacy of polluted water, damaged landscapes, and biodiversity losses, including extirpation and extinction of species.

While the evidence of careful, thoughtful planning leading to unnecessary delays is wanting, the evidence of reckless, poorly planned, and political interventions leading to project failures, downloading of costs to the public, and damaged ecological integrity is legion. That’s why we require guardrails. Ironically, these serve to protect business as well from poor planning, unintended liabilities, and a rush to development with a lack of critical information to succeed.

In Alberta consider the thousands of abandoned gas and oil wells that the industry would like the public taxpayer to remediate. Or the deficit in funds to reclaim the tar sands and coal mines, and deal with their toxic legacy, if indeed this is remotely possible, because of business decisions initially rushed to approval.

We should not be fooled or lulled into a false sense of complacency by empty but soothing filler words and phrases from our governments on the need to erase careful, thoughtful planning and oversight. Be wary of “simplifying, clearer advice, pre-approval, narrowing types of activities for streamlining, allowing construction before approvals, adjusting impact assessment conditions, exempting projects.”

Added to this are the meaningless and mostly vacuous references to mitigation and offsetting to compensate for losses of biodiversity and habitats. This is particularly disingenuous since most of this “compensation” is unmonitored, untested, and unproven. Even the Auditor General of Canada says so.

All of this rush represents the essential dismantling of years of negotiation and public engagement on what the rules are for environmental impact assessments and the guardrails to ensure the public interest is protected in developments. This enthusiasm for economics over the environment overrides principles I thought were well enshrined, at least federally. It’s a significant step backwards.

The dubious quality of government promises is matched by the flood of hype and hyperbole on why we need to make significant environmental sacrifices in favour of the shiny bauble of speedy economic development. What could possibly go wrong with the rush to do so?

Lorne Fitch is a Professional Biologist, a retired Fish and Wildlife Biologist and a former Adjunct Professor with the University of Calgary. He is the author of Streams of Consequence, Travels Up the Creek, and Conservation Confidential.

Lorne Fitch, P. Biol.

It should be abundantly clear to most that the coal industry, coal companies, coal apologists, and the Alberta government have abandoned any attempt to tell the truth and are now on a search for a good fantasy and conspiracy theories to explain to us non-believers and skeptics why coal is good for us and why we shouldn’t worry.

The most laughable fantasy is the contention there is effective regulatory oversight and Albertans can trust the process. If that were true, the proposed Grassy Mountain mine would not be getting another kick at the can despite being roundly rejected by a joint federal/provincial panel. If the process worked there would not have been an unprecedented cancellation of the Mine 14 public hearing by the AER.

Nothing they have said should change your mind and this might even stiffen your resolve that coal is not in Alberta’s future. The facts are in evidence and if you read carefully the rhetoric of the coal side, you will see their difficulty in explaining away issues with environmental impacts, economic reality, and human health concerns.

There is nothing new or innovative about blowing the tops off mountains and dumping the tops into valleys where issues with water quality, hydrologic effects, fish and wildlife losses, recreational/tourism impairment, and downwind deposition of possible carcinogenic compounds will be evident. Measures to minimize these impacts or to mitigate them have been largely ineffective. There is no technological silver bullet or wand available to wave these issues away.

If you are told differently, ask for the evidence that has been collected by an objective, arm’s length third party with appropriate credentials. It should be published in an established scientific journal.

I could repeat myself, as I have done in numerous forms and forums, but at this point, here is a bit of poetic doggerel that is an appropriate response to those with coal on the brain:

Old King Coal is a dirty old soul,

And a dirty old soul is he.

He called for the right,

in the middle of the night,

to mine the mountains, just in sight.

Albertans said, it just ain’t right,

and had a screaming fit.

Said they, we won’t swallow this lump of sh*t.

Old King Coal said we’ll make you rich,

And provided a dubious pitch.

We’ll blast and dump and turn the waters black,

But you know we’ve all got your back.

We won’t prevaricate, pollute, or poison,

At least not much above reason.

Our government said that sounds just fine,

You don’t even have to sign on the dotted line.

But some of us have seen a mine or two,

And know this just isn’t true.

Old King Coal, what are we gonna do,

when the mountains are gone and so are you?

Old King Coal is a rascal of a soul,

And all we’ll be left with is a great big hole.

Lorne Fitch is a Professional Biologist, a retired Fish and Wildlife Biologist and a former Adjunct Professor with the University of Calgary. He is the author of Streams of Consequence, Travels Up the Creek, and Conservation Confident

Subscribe now

Alberta’s comprehensive source for facts about water and coal. Forever Free!

Hello Crowsnest Headwaters Subscribers

Join Corb Lund’s Ride for Water Not Coal.

Corb Lund will lead a three‑day horseback ride event alongside ranchers, musicians, and supporters gathering signatures and delivering messages from the southern foothills all the way to Edmonton. Along the route, riders will be collecting signatures for the Water Not Coal petition “Pony Express” style.

Quote from Corb:

“Every one of the places we stop is a chance for Albertans to stand up for clean water and to defend our mountains and ranchland. These foreign coal companies need to be sent packing. Please come out to one of the stops near you and help support us in this thing. Everybody’s welcome.”

The events will include musical performances, food trucks, and many chances to sign the petition.

Join the Ride for Water Not Coal

Saturday May 16th

10am - Nelson Brothers Lazy H Ranch, Longview

3pm - Twin Cities Saloon, Longview

Sunday May 17th

10am - George Lane Park, High River

1pm - The Confluence, Calgary

Monday May 18th

1pm - Whitemud Equestrian Centre, Edmonton

Bring your friends, share the event!

This is your chance to join part of history - we hope to see you there!

Corb & The Water Not Coal Team

Watch CTV’s interview with Corb . . .

Subscribe now

Please join us alongside our Piikani brothers and sisters next Saturday, May 9th for our 2nd sharing of a prayer ceremony which will begin at 10:00 AM at Napi’s Playground. The location is spectacular, as is the sacred ceremony provided by the Piikani Elders. Being the day before Mother’s Day it seems quite appropriate that we celebrate and offer prayers for the Eastern Slopes of our Mother Earth.

Below is a Google Earth shot of the location and the route to get there which is quite easy from Hwy 22.

We hope you are able to attend.

Napi’s Playground: For using a maps app - 49º 52’ 07.1” N. / 114º 22’ 42.5” W.

From Hwy 22 head west on the Maycroft Rd. (south side of river) and just keep going (approx. 15 minutes) until you come to the T at the forestry trunk road #40. Turn right (north) and shortly after, turn right again onto the flat. This is just south of the gathering corrals which are very visible between the road and the river.