Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Woodland Caribou Under Threat in Oilsands Area, Group Says
OTTAWA - The oilsands could wipe out threatened woodland caribou populations in northern Alberta if regulators fail to protect the boreal forest and its surrounding habitat, warn experts from government, industry and academic sectors.
The oilsands could wipe out threatened woodland caribou populations in northern Alberta if regulators fail to protect the boreal forest and its surrounding habitat, warn experts from government, industry and academic sectors. (Photograph by: Handout, Canwest News Service) In a letter sent Tuesday to the Stelmach and Harper governments, a conservation group said decision makers must listen to the advice of their own experts and restrict oilsands development in at least half of the region.
"It may not be easy, but we think it is possible for you to reconcile the interests of both habitat conservation and the industry in the oilsands area - if you take a clear stand and act decisively now," said the letter, written by Helene Walsh, boreal conservation director at the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society.
Walsh noted the number of woodland caribou has dropped by nearly half since 1993 in the area where industry is concentrated.
"Unless there is a significant change in policy and regulation, there is real danger that the caribou are headed for extinction," wrote Walsh, who is a biologist.
The letter also stressed the region was home to many aboriginal communities and wildlife species.
"Our boreal forests and wetlands cleanse our air, purify our water and moderate our climate," said the letter. "Boreal soils store huge amounts of carbon. When humans disturb intact boreal forests and wetlands, we release that land-based carbon and accelerate the rate of global warming."
The warnings echo the conclusions of a report prepared for the Alberta government last year by a panel of experts that included two oil-producing industry representatives from Golder Associates and ConocoPhillips.
The Athabasca Landscape Team panel recommended immediate action on a management plan to save the woodland caribou populations in the region.
"Boreal caribou will not persist for more than two to four decades without immediate and aggressive management intervention," said the report, which was also prepared by experts in government and the academic sector. "Tough choices need to be made between the management imperative to recover boreal caribou and plans for ongoing bitumen development and industrial land-use."
Walsh said some of the recommended areas for protection do not contain bitumen and would not affect the industry, however, she added the government would have to make difficult choices for some of the habitat areas where there is an overlap with oilsands activity that represents about 40 per cent of the region.
"It's crucial for the caribou," Walsh said in an interview. "Some industry (stakeholders) have signed on to a document that says 50 per cent of the boreal should be protected from industrial use. But when it's in their own back yard they're not so keen."
The Harper government also received a federal report warning that many woodland caribou herds were at risk but recommended further study and consultations last spring.
6 Comments so far
Show AllThe second word of this article - "oilsands" - is deployed by the author to replace the more commonly used word "tarsands."
This word is being inserted into lot or rightwing media franchises (like the Winnipeg-chain the Gazette belongs to) in order to spin this industrial project into sounding less toxic than it is. Exxon and Shell ensure that commercial media outlets are helping them sell their project by making it sound less poisonous.
The world "oilsands" emphasizes the sizzle and the goal of the project (oil) rather than the toxic legacy that the process will leave future generations (tar in the water supply, etc.).
By floating this mild criticism of their money-making scheme along with a weak restriction ("restrict oilsands development in at least half of the region"), the money-seekers hope to sell to the public the notion that it's okay for Big Money to destroy the other half of the region.
Excellent comment qatzelok.
The article also focuses on the loss of animal life - and though biodiversity is incredibly important - there are many indigenous peoples whose lives will be irrevocably changed (if not completely destroyed) by this disaster.
Good points in both of the previous posts.
I'd add that this article's framing of the situation as "pristine Nature vs. Industrial expansion" is also B.S.!
Given that the Tarsands yield a NEGATIVE NET ENERGY it is ridiculous to pretend that they are somehow a benefit to "industry" in the sense of industrial-technic civilization because they generate energy. They DO NOT generate energy, they are energy SINKS!
The various Tarsands projects are only a benefit to specific corporations in the sense that they generate revenue and the wider Wall Street Casino in the sense that they provide a new table to gamble at.
They are a drain on industrial-technic civilization as a whole because they throw away useful Natural Gas, clean water, Hign Plains, and all of the petroleum, metals and plastics used in the equipment to extract and process them while yeilding relatively pathetic amounts of new petroleum destined to be used for wasteful purposes like fueling SUV trips to the Wal-Mart.
This is what happens when even Capitalism-driven industry is alienated from Human Motivation through the power of Undead, Immortal Corporate "persons".
The Tarsands projects represent the Corporations bleeding dry the well of future Capitalist exploitation of resources and value-added extractive industry in exchange for short-term conversion of resources into abstract value holders.
Forget the caribou, the Indigenous, the Human Race, and the Earth for a minute. These projects will assure the impoverishment of the Grandchildren of Oil-Company Executives.
All to feed the maw of a horrible undead thing called a Corporate Person.
Yipe!
-matti.
Mountain top removal of the North.
This report comes at a time when production in the Alberta tar sands is somewhat lower than before, due to the overall economic situation. Some time ago, the Alberta government finally raised the royalty rates - which were still less than what oil co's were paying in Alaska, Norway, etc. But the oil industry is putting enormous pressure - not only through direct lobbying for rolling back the royalty hike, but also by putting out stories in the media clearly linking this royalty hike with the slowing of production. They say particularly that industries moved to Saskatchewan where the Premier apparently has publicly promised not to hike royalties. And now they are threatening that some more might leave for the other neighboring province, BC. Worst of all, such media assault seems to be working - and many Albertans are apparently open to the idea of rolling back the royalty rates, imagining that they can go back to their days of "prosperity" through that action.
I mention the royalty because, the entire discourse and debate within the province seems centered on money, and hardly anything about developing other industries, or about the effects of their current actions on the future wellbeing of their own citizens. Nothing about standing up to the oil companies, or trying to work with the neighboring provinces, asking them NOT to undercut each other through low royalty rates. It's bad enough to foul the environment, but it's even worse to allow a virtual rape of the evironment and not getting paid adequately. I think asking them to close down their tar sands operations may even invite unpredictable and unpleasant reactions - and so, possibly out of the question for now. How do you explain the collective intelligence of a people that did not plan to invest a portion of their royalty earnings in alternative means of livelihood when the going was good? The sad reality is that even Michael Ignatieff has indicated that he was in favor of continuation of the tar sands operations, even as he takes potshots at Stephen Harper's position on climate change. It's sad because there IS a party that clearly articulates an alternative vision (The Green Party of Canada) without any major change in the living standards, but the party has zero seats in the Parliament. And I suppose one cannot even dream of the Green Party winning a majority in ANY of the provinces. As for the wildlife or the First Nations people, I can only imagine where they fall in terms of priority for Albertans.
The First nations people in Alberta have the same issues the first Nations people do in Most of Canada outside the territories of Nunavat, The Yukon and The North West Territories.
If a given tribe is "poor" because of the location of land their reserves might lie on, then "They deserve it because they are lazy".
If they are Rich because resources were found on their lands (some of the richest First Nations tribes are in Alberta) then "They got special treatment that they dont deserve"
I do not see it as any worse are any better Province to Province. You have your enlightened folk, you have the "I never give them a second thought" folk and you have the outright racists.