Conservation Society raises concerns over coal development
The president of the Crowsnest Conservation Society says the region’s limited mountain headwaters and remaining wildlife habitat are central to the organization’s opposition to open-pit coal development.
Brenda Davidson appeared before Crowsnest Pass council July 7 to explain how the conservation organization views the local landscape and why it remains concerned about the proposed Grassy Mountain coal project.
Davidson said council is responsible for balancing employment, economic development and municipal services while the society focuses primarily on environmental protection.
“We don’t want it to be anonymous,” Davidson said. “Everybody sees the world in a different way, but we’d just like you to understand how we see it.”
Davidson said the Rocky Mountains and surrounding forested lands become considerably narrower near the Crowsnest Pass than they are farther north.
She argued that limited remaining space makes the region especially important for water production and wildlife movement.
“If it gets wrecked, it’s gone,” Davidson said. “There’s no other place that they can go.”
She said mountain elevation, snowpack, forest cover and groundwater storage contribute to maintaining stream flows throughout the year.
Davidson expressed concern that land disturbance from mining, forestry and roads could affect how quickly water moves through the landscape.
She also raised concerns about selenium and referred to existing fish consumption guidance related to Crowsnest Lake.
Davidson said she is not a selenium expert and questioned whether existing treatment technology can prevent long-term impacts from coal mining.
She cited environmental concerns in British Columbia’s Elk Valley while acknowledging mining companies are working to improve treatment.
“I think Northback is going to do the best,” Davidson said. “I just don’t know if it’s possible.”
Davidson also focused on wildlife habitat and connectivity.
She said grizzly bears can act as an indicator of broader ecosystem health because landscapes capable of supporting the species are also likely to support other wildlife. The presentation included AI-generated prompts and responses used to illustrate certain points.
Davidson quoted findings from the joint federal-provincial review panel that rejected the previous Grassy Mountain application.
The panel concluded in 2021 that the project was likely to contribute to significant adverse cumulative effects involving species including westslope cutthroat trout, little brown bats, grizzly bears and whitebark pine.
Davidson said the environmental effects of development and reclamation could continue for generations because vegetation grows slowly in the Rocky Mountains.
“For me, those wild things matter,” Davidson said. “Humans need to be very thoughtful about how we use it.”
During discussion, Councillor Tony Vastenhout noted exposed and disturbed rock from highways, railway infrastructure, quarries and natural formations can also contribute minerals to the environment.
Davidson agreed that disturbing rock can release naturally occurring substances.
Councillor Dean Ward said he and Davidson may not agree on the proposed mine but agreed the regulatory process must address environmental concerns.
Ward said the previous application was rejected because the review process concluded it was not satisfactory.
“The process worked,” Ward said.
He said he would not support a mine if regulators determined it cannot operate safely but would support allowing a revised application to be evaluated.
“We want to be responsible,” Ward said. “We want to deal with the issues, whether it be selenium or whatever.”
Davidson said her concern extends beyond selenium to whether wildlife can continue to use the remaining landscape if development removes or alters a significant portion of its habitat.
Council received the presentation without making a motion.