Landowners, mayors divided over coal project exploration approval in Rockies

The Alberta Energy Regulator (AER)'s recent approval of coal exploration on the eastern slopes of the Rocky Mountains is drawing quick reaction from landowners, mayors and community groups across southern Alberta.

The debate over revival of coal development in the region has long been contentious, with supporters arguing it could bring economic development to communities that need it. On the other hand, those opposed to the project raise concerns around long-term risks to land and water. 

On Thursday, the AER approved Northback Holdings' applications with conditions to conduct a coal exploration program at the Grassy Mountain site, which is located in the Municipal District of Ranchland. 

In a written decision, the regulator said the applications met all regulatory requirements and that the exploration program was in the public interest. 

It added that the applications weren't for a coal mine, but for an exploration program at the existing unreclaimed Grassy Mountain mine site.

"The exploration program is designed to improve Northback's understanding of the extent of the Grassy Mountain coal deposit, obtain raw coal samples, and structurally model the coal seam complexities," the decision reads.

It adds that if Northback decides to proceed with mine applications at Grassy Mountain in the future, it must follow a "rigorous regulatory process that all resource development applications must follow," and that accepting the exploration applications "does not constitute approval of a coal mine."

Crowsnest Pass Mayor Blair Painter welcomed the regulator's decision and referenced Northback's promise that the mine would employ roughly 300 people at the job site should it move ahead.

He added he recognized the environmental debate also at play.

"We all want clean water. I want clean water. All the residents of Crowsnest Pass want clean water," he said in an interview. 

"This gives an opportunity for Northback. If they are successful with moving ahead with the mining application, then we can feel confident that they will do this within the regulations of the province and the federal government when it comes to clean water."

Concerns over selenium

Last year, residents of Crowsnest Pass voted decisively in favour of the project in a non-binding vote, with more than 70 per cent of voters voicing their support. 

However, the mine is not actually located in the Crowsnest Pass, but in the nearby Municipal District of Ranchland, which has long stood in opposition of the project. 

"The decision, of course, is very disappointing, although not unexpected," said Ron Davis, reeve of the M.D. of Ranchland, in an interview.

Grassy Mountain was previously rejected in 2021 by the federal government, which said the project would likely cause significant adverse environmental effects, including "on surface water quality, including from selenium effluent discharge." 

In its opposition, Ranchland had noted environmental concerns tied to selenium, but the regulator stated in its recent decision that those concerns didn't apply to the exploration work.

The AER said that based on its conclusions, "impacts from the exploration program on the quality and quantity of water and on downstream users of the Oldman River are unlikely."

The 'elephant in the room'

Still, some landowners and environmental advocates say the development sets the stage for coal mining in a critical watershed that provides drinking water to more than 200,000 people.

"The elephant in the room is that this is not about an exploration permit … It's about the next step or ticking the box to do the next steps toward going for a mine," said Norma Dougal, who is on the board of directors for the Livingstone Landowners Group.

"What we are totally expecting is to have to go back and waste our time at a full-blown hearing. When it's already been shown that a mine at Grassy is not in Alberta's best interest, economically or environmentally."

Davis, the reeve of Ranchland, said he expected that Northback wouldn't be conducting exploration if they didn't have interest in opening a coal mine. He added the M.D. continues to hold environmental concerns.

"Southern Alberta is a very water-poor area. And the loss of any water sources or watersheds are detrimental to southern Alberta particularly," he said. 

"And of course, that goes along with the other problems of contamination of the water resources that we have, which are meager at best."

Others in the region were waiting to see how the next steps would play out. Fort Macleod Mayor Brent Feyter said his council hasn't yet formally discussed the approval.

However, he believes drilling is a necessary part of understanding what a potential mine could look like.

"Overall, drilling is necessary. That's our personal view, just if there is going to be something, they need to know what's there and how best to manage it," Feyter said. 

"We're not trying to skirt around the concerns. On the other hand, we also recognize that coal is a requirement for a lot of products used nationally, internationally."

Northback's permits will be valid for five years, the regulator's decision states. The last three years are to be used for reclamation work.