Wayne Lynch

The Ord’s kangaroo rat is one of almost 20 at-risk animal species in CFB Suffield’s National Wildlife Area, where EnCana wants to drill 1,275 more wells

To make the case for its plan to drill 1,275 shallow gas wells in a protected area near Medicine Hat, EnCana has repeatedly assured critics that the project will have little environmental impact. At a recent hearing session into the project, experts for the company went even further, arguing that cutting back on industrial activity in CFB Suffield’s National Wildlife Area (NWA) could actually threaten some of its rare plant species.

Bill Ross, one of three people on the federal-provincial joint review panel, had asked the company how it would avoid critical habitat of rare plants in the NWA. After some discussion on how exactly critical habitat can be defined, EnCana consultant David Walker said that because oil and gas activity has been happening on the land for 30 years, industrial disturbance is now part of the habitat for rare plant species. (Since 1975, EnCana has drilled 1,145 wells in the NWA, which was established by the federal government in 2003.)

“You might say that what’s going on now — the area, plus the level of disturbance — is critical,” said Walker, a revegetation and erosion control specialist. “….You might say that a threat would be a reduction in the kind of activities that are going on out there now — the traffic, truck traffic, etc. What I’m saying is what’s there now might be considered the default, and that altering that may threaten the habitat.”

Ross replied: “Do I infer from that, Dr. Walker, that you have some disdain for the idea of critical habitat?”

“On the contrary, sir, I’m just suggesting that where the source of disturbance comes from probably doesn’t matter to the plant — whether it’s human-induced or whether it’s naturally induced,” countered Walker. Later, he said that because the area has been so disturbed by cattle grazing and industrial activity in the past, it would be difficult to come up with baseline conditions for the area.

John Kansas, another ecological consultant for EnCana, told the panel that Ord’s kangaroo rat — one of almost 20 federally designated at-risk animal species in the NWA — benefits from disturbance. The wide-eyed rodents use sand dunes for habitat, and Kansas said the rats likely don’t care whether or not a dune occurs naturally or not. “Any form of open sand adjacent to native prairie is fair game for kangaroo rat,” said Kansas.

A coalition of conservation groups, including the Alberta Wilderness Association (AWA), is opposing the project. The AWA’s Cliff Wallis wonders how EnCana can say its project will have an “insignificant” impact on vegetation and wildlife while simultaneously saying disturbances will benefit some species. “Well, what disturbances?.... Tell us the truth. That’s all we say,” says Wallis. “We think their experts are stretching things to try and make this development look good.”

Wallis says that while disturbances are part of a natural cycle, recovery plans of at-risk species across Canada all identify industrial activity as a concern. “If they thought it was such a good thing, they’d be recommending, ‘Oh, let’s go and blast roads all over the place because it will just create lots of great habitat,’” says Wallis. “That’s not what the plans say.”

The environmental coalition told the panel EnCana doesn’t understand the ecosystem nor the importance of the NWA. “Some of what EnCana is proposing may be considered appropriate by some for a landscape zoned for industrial management priorities, but it is clearly inappropriate for a National Wildlife Area,” said Cleve Wershler, a biologist and consultant for the coalition.

Wershler pointed to a recent report that indicates land disturbed by humans provides “low quality sink habitats” for kangaroo rats — habitat where deaths outnumber reproduction. “In spite of this concern, this red flag, EnCana assesses residual effects of the project — including the existing and proposed footprint that contain these habitats — as ‘insignificant,’” he said.

The coalition has denounced EnCana’s environmental impact statement (EIS) as “seriously flawed.” During the hearing, the company has admitted that it didn’t survey rare plants or the nest sites of burrowing owls, another at-risk species in the area. The Department of National Defence (DND), which oversees CFB Suffield and is in charge of wildlife conservation on the base, also expressed concerns about the EIS’s shortcomings. Base commander Lt.-Col. Malcolm Bruce told the panel that EnCana “does not have a proven monitoring and mitigation plan.” He also expressed worry that the company might not survey all at-risk species in the area before drilling.

DND pointed out that in the past, EnCana has drilled in a wetland on the base in spite of regulations forbidding wells in wetlands. The department also noted that EnCana has already caused “adverse environmental effects” in the NWA with its existing operations, and a DND consultant said the department is concerned that if the project is approved, the added environmental effects are “likely to be long-term and potentially irreversible.”

EnCana indicated it’s willing to slow the project’s pace, if that’s what the panel requests. The company wants to drill all 1,275 wells within three years, but Gerry Protti, EnCana’s executive vice-president of corporate relations, told the panel the company could stretch it over four to five years if need be. Protti added that the company is committed to working with NGOs for the “best interests of the environment.“

The hearing is scheduled to wrap up Friday, October 24. The panel then has 90 days to submit recommendations to the federal environment minister. The federal government will ultimately make the decision on whether or not the project goes ahead.