Seven individuals from the local community are contesting the provincial government’s decision regarding a gravel pit situated to the west of Cochrane, Alberta. The pit, established by BURNCO Rock Products Ltd., covers an area equivalent to approximately 100 football fields and is positioned uphill from the Bow River, with the closest proximity being a hundred meters away.
In 2023, the provincial government granted approval for BURNCO to expand the site’s footprint by around five times its current size. BURNCO has assured that they will not extract more than one-sixth of the enlarged area at any given time and has outlined plans to restore the land gradually to its original state as pasture and farmland.
Local residents are expressing concerns about potential environmental repercussions of the operation, particularly related to groundwater risks. The conflict has now shifted to a disagreement over the water use approval granted to BURNCO for the expanded site in 2024, which is being deliberated by the provincial Environmental Appeals Board (EAB).
The Stoney Nakoda community is also engaged in the appeal process, emphasizing potential adverse effects on groundwater, surface water, and wetlands within their land. Additionally, the Town of Cochrane, Rocky View County, and Stoney Nakoda Nations have been granted intervenor status in the appeal proceedings.
While the Town of Cochrane has not opposed BURNCO’s project, they have sought clarification and assurance regarding the potential impacts of the gravel pit. Rocky View County’s stance on the matter remains undisclosed.
Although the City of Calgary has not intervened directly, they previously raised concerns about the pit’s impact on Bow River water quality. Following discussions with BURNCO, Calgary concluded that the associated risks are minimal.
The appellants argue that the current regulatory framework falls short in adequately assessing environmental risks before greenlighting such projects. Ann McKendrick McNabb, a local resident involved in the appeal, highlights the necessity for stringent policies, audits, transparency, and trust to ensure proper execution when significant environmental corridors are affected.
BURNCO has conducted various studies, including wetland assessments and reclamation plans, which they have submitted to the province. However, the appellants are advocating for an independent, audited environmental impact assessment (EIA) as a prerequisite for the company.
In Alberta, an EIA is mandatory for certain projects under provincial environmental protection legislation if uncertainties exist about potential adverse environmental effects. Gravel pits were exempted from mandatory EIAs in 2020 through a regulation amendment to Alberta’s Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act.
Despite not being obligated to undergo an EIA, the environment minister retains the authority to order one if deemed necessary, which has not been the case for the Cochrane West gravel pit. BURNCO asserts that they have followed Alberta’s established environmental permitting procedures.
The appellants stress the financial and time costs associated with participating in the appeal process and express concerns about the system placing ordinary Albertans at a disadvantage. The Environmental Law Centre supports the need for a more structured approach that incorporates public input in the early stages of resource project applications.
The environment ministry refutes claims that the existing system unfairly burdens residents, emphasizing the multiple opportunities available for public input while ensuring fairness and focus in the process. The appeal board has declined requests to halt BURNCO’s water use approval pending a final decision by the environment minister.
Alberta Environment and Protected Areas defends the province’s gravel pit approval regulations as a sensible approach that safeguards the environment. The ministry refrains from commenting on the Cochrane West gravel pit dispute due to the ongoing appeal process.