Conservation groups and some scientists are calling on the province to protect a rare Northern Alberta wetlands-and-lake ecosystem, following TrueNorth Energy’s decision to shelve its $3.3-billion oilsands project in the area.

But TrueNorth, which decided last week to defer its proposed Fort Hills project near Fort McMurray, says the open-pit oilsands mine wouldn’t affect most of the environmentally sensitive wetlands complex.

The Calgary-based company, which has Alberta Energy and Utilities Board (EUB) approval for the project, says it still intends to proceed as soon as it finds a partner to share the financial risks.

The contested area is called the McClelland Lake wetland complex, a peat-forming wetlands with a large lake.

The ecosystem supports at least 14 provincially rare plants in addition to 205 bird species – including occasional visits by endangered whooping cranes.

“This is a priceless piece of Alberta’s natural heritage,” says Richard Thomas, an Edmonton environmental consultant and expert on the province’s boreal forests.

TrueNorth’s surface mining operation would destroy nearly half of the McClelland Lake wetlands and threaten the rest by disrupting the ecosystem’s finely balanced water regime, says Thomas, who represented the Alberta Wilderness Association (AWA) at last summer’s regulatory hearing on the project.

Photo by S. Forest, courtesy of Alberta Wilderness Association
Environmental consultant Richard Thomas photographs part of the fen.

Environmental groups, including the AWA and the Pembina Institute for Appropriate Development, want the provincial government to designate the entire McClelland Lake wetland complex as an ecological reserve – prohibiting any industrial development.

But D’Arcy Levesque, TrueNorth Energy’s vice- president of public and government affairs, says environmental groups are exaggerating the impact of the proposed mining operation.

Most of the area that environmentalists consider unique – which includes 12 smaller sinkhole lakes and a large “patterned fen” or peat-forming wetlands – is outside TrueNorth’s development area, Levesque says.

However, at last July’s EUB hearing, “TrueNorth stated that the proposed mine footprint would directly affect 49 per cent of the McClelland Lake wetland and approximately 45 per cent of the fen,” according to the EUB’s decision.

Levesque says the EUB, in approving the project, attached strict conditions to ensure the large lake and the majority of the wetlands undisturbed by development are protected.

Richard Thomas photo, courtesy Alberta Wilderness Association
An aerial photo of the McClelland Lake wetlands.

“There are clearly parameters and conditions in place to protect the overall ecosystem of the area.”

But Gail MacCrimmon, a policy analyst with the Pembina Institute, says little scientific research has been done on the ecological characteristics of such large wetland-and-lake ecosystems in Northern Alberta.

“Once you go in there (with industrial development), basically the impacts are irreversible,” she says.

Levesque argues that Alberta Sustainable Development has thoroughly reviewed any potential impacts on the McClelland Lake complex. The department, after receiving a request from TrueNorth, decided last June to change a regional plan that had prohibited surface mining in the area.

The government amended the integrated resource plan to allow the company to recover an estimated one billion barrels of bitumen underlying a portion of the wetlands, while protecting the rest.

TrueNorth hired Linda Halsey, a University of Alberta wetlands scientist, who produced a report stating that the McClelland Lake complex wasn’t unique, but merely representative of similar wetlands in the region.

TrueNorth also committed to provide Halsey with a $1-million grant for a five-year study, to compare the wetlands complex affected by the oilsands mining with a separate, unaffected wetlands nearby.

Halsey’s view that the McClelland Lake complex is merely representative of similar wetlands was challenged at the EUB hearing by Diana Horton, an internationally known peatlands-wetlands expert from Iowa.

Horton described the McClelland Lake complex as one of the largest and most spectacular patterned fens in the province, rivalling the natural beauty of sites in the Canadian Rockies.

The complex had been nominated for preservation under Alberta’s Special Places program, but was never protected by legislation.

Removing half the fen “would destroy its ecological integrity and aesthetic value,” Horton told the EUB.

She recommended that the regulatory board either deny TrueNorth’s application or prohibit mining in the entire McClelland Lake drainage basin.

The EUB, in its decision, concluded that the estimated one billion barrels of bitumen underlying the wetland complex “represents a significant resource that should be recovered . . . as long as it can be done in a manner that minimizes damage to the rest of the complex.”

Levesque says TrueNorth has so far spent about $120 million on the Fort Hills project, including exploratory drilling, engineering, securing regulatory approval and investments in Fort McMurray.

The company, which last month also received approvals from Alberta Environment for the project, opposes any plan to have the McClelland Lake complex set aside as an ecological reserve.

“It goes without saying that we have every intention of preserving our options to proceed,” Levesque says.

Thomas, however, says the entire wetlands complex could be protected by making just over four per cent of TrueNorth’s 3,450-square-kilometre mining area into an ecological reserve.

He says the AWA will mount a campaign to put public pressure on the government to protect the complex.

MacCrimmon says the Pembina Institute is seeking legal advice on a possible court challenge to the project.

The institute is also considering a separate appeal to the Alberta Environmental Appeal Board.