Water Amendment Act, 2025 (Bill 7):
At the end of October 2025, the Government of Alberta introduced Bill 7, Water Amendment Act. The principle changes include:
1. Permitting “low-risk” inter-basin transfers allowing water to be moved from one river basin to another;
2. Combining the Peace-Slave and Athabasca River Basins into a single basin; and
3. Expanding Ministerial power and discretion under the Act.
Though the results of public feedback from the Water Availability Engagement has not been made available, it appears that the proposed changes are not consistent with the concerns expressed in the consultation.
There is a dearth of scientific observation on the ecological impacts of inter-basin water transfers. As such, precaution is imperative. Existing literature suggests that inter-basin water transfers may have physical, chemical, hydrological, and biological implications for both the donor and recipient basins. River basins have distinct characteristics, including acidity, turbidity, temperature, and chemical content of water, as well as the various species that reside within and near the aquatic environment. Inter-basin transfers result in the mixing of these distinct waters, leading to changes in chemical balance and habitat characteristics, and easing the movement of organisms that promote the introduction of invasive species and the spread of disease. To be clear, the health of aquatic ecosystems is at risk with inter-basin transfers of water.
Combining water basins appears to allow the inter-basin transfer of water without environmental assessment, evaluation of cumulative effects, adequate watershed management or public consultation beyond directly affected parties. In other words, the legislation deems the two distinct water basins to be one. Expanding Ministerial power for decision-making obviates the necessity for public consultation, environmental assessment and parliamentary debate. Public processes are an essential aspect of good decision-making.
Bill 7 also allows for the easier transfer of water use through water licenses by extending the point of use or point of diversion beyond those set out in the original licence. More positively, a more consistent measuring and reporting of actual water use may be required. Allowing the transfer of water from the licensed use to another, however, would allow for the expansion of irrigated acres and, possibly, the diversion of water to other industrial uses. Reducing return flows from existing irrigation systems may further strain rivers and riparian areas. In a closed basin, like the Oldman River basin, increasing water use is unarguably at the expense of river flows that already do not meet minimum objective a portion of the summer. Expanding irrigated acres is also not limited to existing cultivated land, but may include extant (and diminishing) native grassland.
The current Water Act identifies Water Conservation Objectives (WCOs) that consider aquatic and riparian health as well as needs for tourism, transportation, waste assimilation. The WCOs are not ecologically sound. The amended Water Act should reflect instream flow needs. A 2024 Surface Water Management Performance Audit by Alberta’s Auditor General found that (p. 9) “the Department of Environment and Protected Areas has no water conservation objectives in most basins; does not know if existing water conservation objectives are working; lacks robust processes to monitor water pressures, assess risks, and decide when water conservation objectives are needed, and; has ineffective processes to approve licences and monitor compliance, such as not enforcing licensee compliance with conditions.”
The proposed amendments continue to promote the notion that water licences are ‘property rights’ rather than a ‘right of use’. The FITFIR approach to water management has inherent limitations considering the anticipated water regimes under prolonged drought scenarios under climate change. These limitations are complicated by the notion of property rights. Water transfers should maintain public transparency with identification of risks and benefits to the environment and the public good.
To summarize, SAGE believes that meeting water conservation objectives (WCOs) and preserving grasslands should be a minimum requirement before allowing the greater use of water in closed basins. Regardless of the water licences under FITFIR, meeting minimum flows for aquatic ecosystem health is the priority. Water is not a commodity ‘owned’ by water license holders, it is a right-of-use allowed against aquatic health and competing demands in a complex economy.
Holdbacks Removed from License Transfers:
On April 4, 2025, the Government of Alberta announced the removal of the 10% holdback on most water license transfers. “Alberta’s government has released three new policy directions so that water is only held back when absolutely needed. These new rules will make water transfers easier, free up more water in southern and central Alberta, and support economic growth for agriculture, industry and municipalities.” The 10% water holdbacks were applied to 256 out of 407 license transfers undertaken in the South Saskatchewan and Battle River basins since January 2025.
The management of holdbacks for water transfers is a small but important mechanism of maintaining river flows in over-allocated basins and under diminished flows due to the impacts of climate change. Relying on the largesse of decision-makers to meet future instream flow needs puts aquatic health at risk.
Emergency Statutes Amendment Act, 2024 (Bill 21):
The Emergency Statutes Amendment Act amends three acts to give the province more authority during emergencies. These include the Emergency Management Act, the Forest and Prairie Protection Act, and the Water Act. These Acts will be amended to accommodate a greater scope of provincial power during an emergency.
Amendments to the Emergency Management Act are designed to ensure that the Government of Alberta can assume authority over local emergency response. Amendments to the Forest and Prairies Protection Act provide the province with the authority to assume command and actively support municipalities responding to a wildfire. And amendments to the Water Act provide Cabinet authority to determine priority of water use under water licenses, and allow ‘low risk’ transfers between major water basins for use during emergencies like a prolonged drought.
Concerns are best articulated by a ABLawg.ca report:
“We believe that the day-to-day rule of law governing water and environmental management could be comprehensive and flexible enough to set out legislated courses of action to deal with true, unexpected emergencies related to water. If there are to be Executive powers related to such emergencies, they should be clearly defined and limited and their exercise should be appealable. Emergency response is not the place to tuck huge, practically unlimited Executive power. At the very least, the non-amended emergency provisions regarding water in the Water Act should be restored, and the water related amendments deleted, with certain exceptions such as the provision stipulating that emergency measures apply to deemed licenses. We believe that government and Legislature, with public and expert input, and meeting Constitutional obligations to Indigenous communities, should carefully examine the day-to-day water management law with the goal that it incorporates emergency response, as much as possible and feasible. This will require amendments to effect better rational and equitable water management, including regarding the mitigation of climate change and efforts to adapt to these changes, and to live within our ecological limits. Legislatively giving the Executive broad and ill-defined power and the almost unlimited discretion to avoid complying with the laws and policies that apply in “non-emergency” situations is a failure of governance. This is especially evident in respect to responding to water related emergencies through inter-basin transfers.” (Powell, Kwasniak, Barber, Luo, 2024).
In summary, water emergencies are best avoided by good long-term monitoring of water flows and quality, preserving the eastern slopes for the natural retention of water, and planning for sustainable demand through water modelling that accommodates climate change scenarios and maintains healthy flow regimes for aquatic ecosystems. Relying on ad hoc inter-basin transfers of water to meet unsustainable demand is not an adequate response in the long term.
SAGE concerns:
– Combining water basins without public consultation and assessment of environmental impacts risks aquatic and riparian ecosystem health.
– Expanding the latitude of water use under the current water license system increases the amount of water being removed from river systems, which already do not meet minimum flows for river health for portions of the year.
What can you do? Express your concerns to your MLA regarding the over-allocation of water in the South Saskatchewan River Basin. Minimum river flows are required for aquatic health, for sustaining cottonwood forests, for recreation, for tourism, and to dilute pollutants introduced into river systems from stormwater and wastewater treatment discharges.