Letters to Government

SAGE writes letters to all levels of government; municipal, provincial and federal. Letters on issues that are recent or unresolved may be posted here, but the list is not comprehensive. 

All our communications may be found in the Newsletters archive.

 

Re: Agricultural Operations Practices Act (AOPA), 

2 November 2012

Hon. Verlyn Olson QC

Minister,AlbertaAgriculture and Rural Development (AARD)

228 Legislature Building
10800 - 97 Avenue
Edmonton,ABT5K 2B6

Dear Minister Olson:

Regulations under Agricultural Operations Practices Act (AOPA), legislation dealing with livestock operations and manure management, will expire in 2014.  It is our understanding that AARD is considering what changes may be needed to the regulations as well as to the Act itself. We are writing to encourage you to undertake a full review of AOPA. We also are providing suggestions for improvements we would like you to consider.

Environmental impacts of confined feeding operations has been an issue of concern for the Southern Alberta Group for the Environment (SAGE) since the mid 1990s when we first became aware that our region was in the process of developing the highest concentrations of feedlots in North America and that unacceptable levels of contamination of air and water were occurring. In 2002, when the Natural Resources Conservation Board (NRCB) assumed responsibility for regulating confined feeding operations under AOPA, we had high expectations of improvement in prevention and mitigation of environmental contamination.  Some gains have been made however there is still need for improvement in regulation of confined feeding operations.

According to the Oldman State of the Watershed Report (2010), there are over 500 confined feeding operations in the Oldman Watershed and the large majority of these are in the lower prairie portions of the watershed. Irrigated portions of theCounty ofLethbridge have the highest density of feedlots, pig barns, and poultry facilities.  Water quality in the prairie subbasins of the Oldman Watershed is determined to be of poor to fair quality due to excess nitrogen, phosphorus, suspended solids and fecal coliforms.  Our region also has a very high rate of water-borne enteric pathogens.  There is little doubt that livestock operations are contributing to degradation of water quality and to human health problems.  Air quality is also degraded due to odour and dust, particularly in areas of high concentration of confined feeding operations.

Key suggestions for improving the legislation that regulates livestock operations follow.

°        Revise the purpose statement of AOPA to include a public interest mandate, with less focus on promoting growth of the livestock industry. There are many examples where growth of livestock operations has superseded or compromised human health and environmental considerations. This is not sustainable.

°        Expand the definition of “affected person” or “directly affected party” under AOPA to include not only neighbours of the confined feeding operation, but also any person or group who has a legitimate interest, representation of which is necessary for a fair decision. This is particularly relevant to consideration of cumulative effects.

°        Include a requirement to assess cumulative environmental effects in decisions about approval or expansion of confined feeding operations.

°        Change AOPA to require that all confined feeding operations, including those constructed before 2002 when AOPA was first introduced, are required to meet AOPA requirements within a set time frame. Decommission operations that fail to meet requirements within the established time frame.

°        Provide more clarity to the Natural Resources Conservation Board (NRCB), who is responsible for approval and compliance of livestock operations under AOPA. This includes ensuring measures that protect the environment are required and not discretionary.

°        Require that manure application be limited not only by nitrate-nitrogen concentration but also by phosphorus concentration and salinity to control accumulation of phosphorous and salts in soil and runoff into surface water. There is ample scientific information to support this change.

°        Improve requirements for operators to monitor effects of operations on water (surface and groundwater), air and soil and require that monitoring data collected under AOPA is independently verified and is public information. Operation-specific monitoring would complement improved monitoring by government to determine regional effects on air and water quality. 

°        Change AOPA to allow NRCB to issue fines and administrative penalties. This would allow more effective and timely enforcement action against violators of AOPA. Currently prosecutions done through the courts take months if not years and fines are not sufficient disincentive to ‘bad’ operators. 

°        Provide more effective requirements and tools under AOPA to suspend and decommission operations that are inappropriately sited or that fail to comply with enforcement orders.

 

We encourage you to undertake a full review of AOPA and would appreciate serious consideration of our suggestions for improving the legislation. Please keep us informed of your decisions and opportunities for input.

 

Yours sincerely

Braum Barber

Chair 

Cc        Hon. Diana McQueen, Minister, Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development

           Hon. Fred Horne, Minister, Alberta Health and Wellness

To download a copy of the letter in PDF format, click here.

 

            

 

 

Re. Land Use in Alberta & Bill 202

September 25, 2012

 

Honourable Diana McQueen

5136B - 52 Avenue
Drayton Valley, AB
Canada T7A 1S5
Phone: (789)542-3355 
Toll-Free: 1-800-542-7307         
Fax: (780) 542-3331
 

Dear Minister McQueen:

 

The Southern Alberta Group for the Environment (SAGE) is supportive of the private member’s bill (Bill 202) as advanced by Dr.Neil Brown, MLA, Calgary Mackay-Nose Hill. The bill advances more transparency around the privatization of public prairie rangeland in southern Alberta by making publically available all wildlife habitat reporting, and by requiring a 90 day waiting period to allow public comment about the sale of such lands.

 

It is in the long-term interest of Albertans to retain and manage public lands for the protection and maintenance of biodiversity and species at risk and the other ecological goods and services that native ecosystems provide, such as soil conservation and watershed protection. This proposed legislation, unlike current policy, offers Albertans an opportunity to be involved in promoting values that support the preservation of natural ecosystems. We would prefer comprehensive regulation, policy and procedures regarding sale of public land that reflects the recommendations contained in the attached document prepared in 2011 by several conservation organizations.

 

Premier Redford has promised Albertans that there would be greater transparency in the way the government conducts its business. Dr. Brown’s bill embodies this promise.

 

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

 

Sincerely,

Braum Barber

Executive Director, SAGE

cc:       Dr. Neil Brown, MLA, Calgary MacKay-Nose Hill

Click to download a pdf copy of this letter; it will open in a new window.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

June 28, 2012 

To        Prime Minister Harper
            Government of Canada

Cc:       Premier Redford
            Jim Hillyer, M.P. Lethbridge Consituency
            Hon. Diana McQueen, Minister of Environment & SRD
            Megan Leslie, M.P., NDP Environment Critic
            Elizabeth May, Green Party of Canada
            Kirsty Duncan, M.P., Liberal Party Environment Critic

            It was William Petty, the founder of classical political economy, who said, “labour is the father of material wealth, the earth is its mother.”  It seems that the father has been killed; and what the Government of Canada under your leadership is currently doing to the mother is mythically unspeakable. The unfolding of this oedipal tragedy is manifested in Bill C-38, and represents more generally the ideological disconnect between economy, society, and the environment (upon which economy and society are dependent).

            Please consider the following list of recent actions by the Government of Canada that substantiate our concerns. Many of these actions were components of the 430-page omnibus bill recently passed by parliament, of which more than 170 pages were amendments to environmental assessment and regulations, and to laws addressing environmental charities. 

This list is as follows:

-        Making significant changes to environmental laws and procedures through an unprecedented omnibus bill that allows little opportunity for scrutiny or debate (particularly with limitations set on parliamentary timelines).

-        Diminishing of the statutory protection of fish habitat to those of ‘important’ species with commercial, aboriginal, or recreational value. Unfortunately nature is not so selective – in other words, protecting habitat protects the perseverance of all fish species (the rationale of previous legislation), so protecting habitat for ‘important’ fish species is irrational, both in intent and in practice.

-        Apparent violation of the obligation of the federal government to consult with First Nations to accommodate their treaty and aboriginal rights.

-        Federal government asserting control over the approval process for pipelines (like the proposed Northern Gateway pipeline, Trailbreaker, and Kinder Morgan’s Trans Mountain expansion), limiting independent regulatory oversight and the opportunity for transparent scientific assessment and public process including the participation of environmental non-government organizations.

-        Limiting timelines for environmental assessment, including 18 months for an NEB hearing, regardless of the complexity of the proposed project, and the level of scrutiny required to protect the public interest and welfare by protecting the environment.

-        Canadian backsliding on previous environmental protection commitments that have allegedly been safeguarded in trade deals (so as to prevent a global race-to-the-bottom of environmental stewardship in a crass effort to attract investment and development).

-        Canadian withdrawal from the Kyoto Accord, which represented a very small commitment towards the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.

-        Eliminating funding to the Polar Environment Atmospheric Research Laboratory (PEARL) in Eureka, Nunavut, which makes key measurements used to detect and analyze the ozone hole over the Arctic (the largest ever having been detected last winter).

-        Eliminating funding for the Experimental Lakes Area, a 44-year-old program covering 58 small lakes that scientists have used to conduct real-world experiments on entire ecosystems. Research done in this program has dramatically altered environmental policy across North America, and has incubated some of the world’s greatest research on water while developing some of the world’s leading scientists.

-        Eliminating funding for the National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy (NRTEE), an important source of research on the relationships between economy, society and the environment.

-        Massively cutting Environment Canada’s budget by 20% and reducing its staff by 11% in 2011 after a decade of steady budget cuts that had already left it barely functional. Core functions of many departments, like habitat protection or monitoring of air pollution, have been reduced or cut as a result.

-        Undermining food sovereignty by amending the Seeds Act and Plant Breeder Rights, eliminating enforcement of the Product of Canada label, and prioritizing trade deals that benefit multinational corporations instead of local farmers.

-        Muzzling of government (public) scientists in the media: Environment Canada prevented David Tarasick from speaking about his ozone layer research, which had been published in the journal Nature; the Privy Council Office stopped Kristina Miller, a researcher at Fisheries and Oceans, from granting interviews about her work on sockeye salmon decline in B.C., findings previously published in the journal Science; Environment Canada ordering scientists attending the International Polar Year Conference in Montreal to have a ‘government liaison’ present during conversations with reporters; Scott Dallimore, a geoscientist working for National Resources Canada, requiring a lengthy process involving ministerial approval to gain permission to be interviewed by journalists about a paper published in Nature.

-        Environment Minister Peter Kent’s unsupported accusations of ‘money laundering’ involving foreign and domestic environmental agencies, taking sides between business and the environment rather than seeking consensus in addressing concerns voiced in the best interest of all Canadians, present and future.

-        Public Safety Minister Vic Toews listing domestic threats ‘based on grievances – real or perceived – revolving around the promotion of various causes such as animal rights, white supremacy, environmentalism and anti-capitalism’.

            Clearly these amendments to the National Energy Board act, the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, the Fisheries Act, and the Species at Risk Act were not intended to improve the protection and conservation of our environment and natural resources, but a systematic effort to ‘provide greater certainty to investors keen to develop Canada’s vast resources’ as promoted by Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver. Removing substantive rules from acts and relegating them to regulations with ministerial oversight is clearly not in the public interest. as it transforms scientific assessment into political expedience, promoting the special interests of industry at the expense of the long term interests of Canadians.

            Abandoning federal responsibilities for fisheries and oceans, which have historically provided a provincial/federal balance in the process of environmental impact assessment, does not make Canada stronger economically in the long term – quite the opposite, sound environmental protection makes Canada more economically resilient in the long term. Harassing and intimidating environmental organizations does not advance democratic conversation – quite the opposite, it diminishes the voices that can offer creative alternatives in the best interests of all Canadians, present and future. 

            Wealth and prosperity cannot be measured by the GDP. Real prosperity represents the well-being of citizens, and economic and social resilience for future generations. Undermining the ability of our environment to provide the natural resources required by our economy and to perform as a sink for our wastes enervates our collective prosperity. As the Earl of Lauderdale observed, the transfer of public wealth into private riches does not serve the long term interests of a nation. In short, the calculated and cynical assault on environmental protection, conservation and discussion by your government is a transparent effort to foster short-term economic goals that will leave us all much poorer, now and in the future.

Sincerely, 

Braum Barber

Southern Alberta Group for the Environment
(SAGE)

 

To download the letter as a PDF file, click here.

 

So far, we have received the following responses to the previous letter:  

From The Honourable Diana McQueen (PC), Minister of Environment and Sustainable Resource Development, Alberta.

AR 48897

August 2, 2012

Mr. Braum Barber

Southern Alberta Group for the Environment (SAGE)

Box 383

Lethbridge, AB T1J 3E9

Dear Mr. Barber:

Thank you for copying me on your letter dated June 28, 2012, regarding the Government of Canada’s Bill C-38. Premier Alison Redford has also reviewed your comments and asked me to respond on behalf of the Government of Alberta.

I assure you this government is first and foremost committed to protecting our environment, while ensuring responsible resource development. Alberta has a proven track record of delivering a strong regulatory system that allows for progress while protecting our air, land, water, and biodiversity, The Government of Alberta is working with the federal government to ensure our environment and resources are protected and managed well int the future.

The proposed changes to the federal environmental assessment program have the potential to strengthen Canada’s current rigorous environmental requirements and legislation and move towards a more effective and efficient approach to environmental assessments. No matter what happens with the Canadian program, every project within Alberta will continue to undergo a strict approval process backed by our Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act. Our approval process is open and transparent, allowing for ample public input to ensure every project maintains our strict standards, mitigates impacts, and meets Alberta’s needs.

Public engagement is an important component of our policy structure. Consultation by Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development regarding potential impacts on Rights and Traditional Uses is carried out in accordance with Alberta’s First Nations Consultation Guidelines. We are committed to working with our First Nations partners and Albertans, and we will listen to their concerns and make the best possible decisions for our province.

In the past, the Government of Alberta and the Government of Canada have worked collaboratively to align our processes and, where possible, reduce or eliminate overlap and duplication through the Canada-Alberta Agreement for Environmental assessment Cooperation. The Government of Alberta is looking forward to continuing this relationship and reviewing the proposed federal legislative changes.

The Government of Alberta fully recognizes the environmental challenges associated with development in the oil sands region, and we are shifting to a cumulative effects management system that seeks to balance economic development with environment and natural resources protection at a regional level. Completion of the regional plans is one of this government’s priorities.

Our commitments to enhancing environmental monitoring and implementing cumulative effects management will be strengthened further as we move to a single regulator for Alberta’s energy sector. The project will eliminate duplication among the work of multiple jurisdictions and streamline stringent environmental regulation processes, allowing us to focus effectively on our environmental and sustainable resource development priorities.

Although the world will continue to rely on fossil fuels for some time to come, the Government of Alberta takes our environmental and humanitarian responsibilities seriously and we are working to improve how fossil fuels are developed and used. We will continue to be at the forefront of effective and groundbreaking environmental and resource management policy. I am confident we will deliver a better Alberta by building on the strength and passion that Albertans have for developing our natural resources responsibly, while protecting our air, land, water, and biodiversity.

Sincerely,

Diana McQueen

Minister

Please click here to download the original letter (PDF in a new window) or go to our Newsletters, September 2012.

 

From the NDP Environment Critic, The Honourable Megan Leslie, M.P., in response to the letter to Prime Minister Harper regarding Bill C-38 (SAGE July 2012 Newsletter). 

 

Braum,

Thank you for taking the me to write to me sharing your detailed list of concerns with the Harper government’s assault on the environment. Like you, I am deeply troubled by the serious impacts their decisions have on the well-being of our environment and our health.

With their omnibus budget bill, the Conservatives are trying to bury critical changes to environmental legislation in a bill that is more than 400 pages long. Fully one third of the bill proposes changes to Canada’s environmental protection laws that do little more than grease the wheels for major pipeline projects.

Specifically, the omnibus budget bill will repeal and replace the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA), the central piece of federal environmental legislation for environmental protection. In addition to millions of dollars in cuts to Environment Canada and its research capacity, the Conservatives are eliminating the National Roundtable on the Environment and the Economy, one of the most respected voices speaking out about the realies of climate change.

By gutting the environmental assessment process, the Harper government is burdening our grandchildren with costly environmental clean-ups. Under the guise of ‘streamlining,’ they are allowing our environmental protection system to become a process of rubber stamping. The Conservatives have removed the amount of public participation on in environmental assessments, and given cabinet ministers the unchecked power to make decisions about major development projects.

At a time when the government should be strengthening habitat protection, the Conservatives aim to gut one of the strongest environmental laws in the country. These changes will set Canada back decades. By eliminating provisions to protect fish habitat, the Conservatives will be better positioned to fast track their agenda of pipelines, oil super tankers, mega mines and other major industrial projects. With the stroke of a pen, this government aims to wipe out decades of progress and condemn future generations to a less diverse environment.

There is nothing radical or un-Canadian about wanting to pass on a healthy environment to future generations and for having an expectation that our precious natural resources be developed in a sustainable manner with maximum benefits for Canadians. What is radical is the short-sighted evisceration of the laws meant to protect Canada's environment, the firing of government scientists and pulling out of international efforts to fight catastrophic climate change.

The hypocrisy of the government’s statements regarding opponents of their environmental agenda is clear. In many cases the companies that are profiting from oil-sands development are themselves partially foreign-owned.

New Democrats will continue to oppose the government’s moves to abrogate its duty to ensure fulsome environmental assessments for major projects, and we will continue to ask why this government is interfering with what it had assured Canadians would be an arms-length and independent joint review panel process.

Sincerely,

Megan

Download the PDF letter from the NDP by clicking here.

 

May 1, 2012

To: Jim Hillyer, M.P.  (Federal)

From: Braum Barber, Southern Alberta Group for the Environment

Re: Fisheries Act

The Southern Alberta Group for the Environment (SAGE) is concerned about the changes being considered for the Fisheries Act. The Fisheries Act now states (Section 35) that "no person shall carry on any work or undertaking that results in the harmful alteration, disruption or destruction of fish habitat." An early draft leaked to the media proposed the following: "no person shall carry on any work, undertaking or activity, other than fishing, that results in an adverse effect on a fish of economic, cultural or ecological value." The burden of proof in this draft has now been shifted onto the "value" of fish to be protected, rather than the habitat upon which all fish rely for their health. In essence, habitat provisions have been removed from the proposed changes to the Fisheries Act.

We are concerned that these proposed changes are more for expediting large projects than for the health of the ecosystem. This, if true, suggests that somehow long-term ecosystem health is disconnected from long-term economic resilience - nothing could be further from the truth.

We acknowledge the recent statements from Minister Ashfield supporting habitat protection, however, we request that you, in your capacity as our representative in the House of Commons, caution for a balanced and scientifically- supported approach to addressing changes to the Fisheries Act. Any changes to the Act should continue to emphasize habitat protection as an intrinsic value and as a basis for our collective prosperity.

We look forward to your thoughtful consideration of our concern.

Sincerely,

Braum Barber

SAGE

Download the letter above as a PDF file by clicking here.

 

 

 

 

 

Bow Island Land Sale SAGE Oct 2010 - Sale of public land at the confluence of the Bow and Oldman Rivers

Bow Island Land Sale SAGE Nov 2010 - Sale of public land at the confluence of the Bow and Oldman Rivers

Wetlands SAGE Nov 2010 - Wetlands Policy in Alberta

Bill 29 SAGE Nov 2010 - Alberta Parks Act