History

• The long‐term interest of all Albertans is best served by retaining public lands as a trust held by government for conservation purposes.
• Protective notations should be applied to public lands in large blocks of prairie, Environmentally Significant Areas, and other important habitat areas for at risk species.
• Regulations are needed that clearly lay out procedures to be used for public land sale or trade and that require public notice and consultation.

• Instead of the science-based 50% protection recommended by the Boreal Forest Conservation Framework, (which Ontario, Quebec, Manitoba and the NWT are making great progress on) the Government of Alberta will only add 10% to the current 6% of “protected” land base in the region.  And while conservation science recommends areas free from industrial development, the proposed new Alberta “protected areas” allow development of existing oil and gas dispositions. Some allow industrial forestry.
• The vast majority of caribou habitat is not protected, and no complete range is protected. AWA believes this decision will guarantee the extinction of woodland caribou in the Athabasca region by totally ignoring Alberta’s caribou committee recommendation to immediately protect and restore their habitat.
• “Where we most need representative areas protected, we see a sacrifice zone for industry,” states Carolyn Campbell, AWA Conservation Specialist. “The protected areas do not exclude industry and are not representative in the central and southern boreal, where the most pressures are coming from tar sands, forestry and climate change.”

• "The South Saskatchewan Regional Plan must include clear, enforceable thresholds on human impacts.
• "The regional plan offers a perfect opportunity to address the clear shortfall in the province’s protected areas land base in southern Alberta. "Less than 2% of our Foothills, and less than 1% of our Grasslands are protected. By any standards that is not enough."

• 74.3% of participants believed that “At present, the balance between developing and using our land versus conservation of our land is too focused on economic development and growth.”
• 70.2% of participants would be “Willing to accept limits to Energy Development to provide for more Protected Areas.”
• 73.1% of participants would be “Willing to accept limits to Energy Development to provide for more Watershed Protection.”
• 71.5% of participants would be “Willing to accept limits to Energy Development to provide for more Habitat Protection.”
• 95% of participants were “concerned” or “very concerned” about the “Failure to consider the combined (i.e. cumulative) effects of land-use activities.”

AWA meets with Premier Ed Stelmach; Ted Morton, Minister of Sustainable Resource Development; and Hector Goudreau, Minister of Tourism, Parks, Recreation and Culture. AWA emphasizes the need for the Land-Use Framework process to be supported by 100 percent of Cabinet and by the Premier. During the meeting, the Premier states there will be an increase to the number of parks and protected areas in Alberta.

Government invitation for participation by AWA and other members of the Alberta Environment Network in Land-Use Framework working groups is met with demands for improvement in the process. In the document “Criteria for Effective Process and Substantive Policy Direction for Alberta’s Land-Use Framework,” prepared in cooperation with AWA, CPAWS, Pembina, FAN and others, environmental NGOs demand effective process through goal clarity, clarity of government’s commitment to implement the Land-Use Framework, effective process design, and effective process support. As well, the groups want substantive policy direction for the Framework and criteria for a commitment to land-use planning in Alberta. The groups seek commitment from the Premier and Cabinet, a statutory basis and binding effect, and integrated planning. The government responds with a number of meetings with group representatives and with the participation of Ted Morton, Minister of Sustainable Resource Development, in an initial Land-Use Framework meeting in Red Deer. AWA attends and agrees to participate despite the lack of commitment to the demands of the environmental community. Minister Morton publicly states at the Red Deer meeting that he has the support of about half of the caucus for this process.

• Public land should be managed according to an ecosystem-based management model that makes ecological needs primary and other uses secondary.
• Public land should be managed with the goal of retaining the current base of public land in perpetuity.
• A public decision-making process regarding public land should be meaningful, accessible, and enshrined in legislation.
• Within reason, public access to public land should be improved by either eliminating the need to obtain permission from grazing leaseholders or by making the process of obtaining permission less cumbersome.
• Public land management principles and tools should be included in clear, meaningful, and enforceable legislation.

• The immediate establishment of 10 specific natural heritage sites as protected areas (Bighorn, Birch-Wabasca, Caribou Mountains, Bodo, Cardinal, Castle, Chinchaga, Sheep River, Lakeland, and Milk River-Sage Creek)
• No industrial or commercial development within protected areas
• At least 12 percent (20 percent of the Boreal Natural Region, 25 percent of the Foothills Natural Region) of each of Alberta’s 20 natural subregions permanently designated as protected within five years
• The immediate implementation of the CAPP-ENGO agreement

A 1993 recommendation made to the Minister of Environmental Protection by his public advisory committee has, to this date, been ignored. The committee recommended that Alberta Agriculture, Food and Rural Development (AAFRD) and Alberta Environmental Protection (AEP) design and propose a methodology for delivering a Public Lands Management Strategy for Alberta. They recommended the following:

• That the public be involved
• That AFRD and AEP be seen as equal partners
• That the role of the government be seen as facilitative
• That the outcome be geared toward defining roles and responsibilities for the policy development department for the White Area
• That the outcome clearly articulate the jurisdiction for public land administered by other agencies/departments

The provincial government, under the Ministry of Community Development, initiates the Special Places program. It is substantially diluted from the original draft document and ignores many of the Advisory Committee’s recommendations. Its vision is “to balance the goal of preservation, with the parallel goals of outdoor recreation, heritage appreciation, and tourism/economic development.” The program designates 29 new protected areas and invites all Albertans to nominate parcels of provincial public land for protection. Over 400 nominations are submitted. At the local level, volunteer local committees are asked to examine candidate sites and provide advice on boundary options, site-specific management guidelines, and appropriate land-use activities. Environmental groups are very disappointed with this approach because there was a lack of province-wide perspective on these local committees.

A multi-stakeholder Special Places Provincial Coordinating Committee (PCC) is appointed to review public nominations, provide overall direction for the program, and advise on candidate sites for detailed consideration through a local committee process. The PCC represents the broad interests of Albertans and includes representatives from more than 20 stakeholder groups, including local governments, industry, and environmental organizations. Local committees are also formed, and their recommendations in certain areas often conflict with those of the PCC.

AWA releases an itemized list of actions that the government needs to take before AWA will participate in Special Places 2000 committees:

• Create legislative certainty in terms of what a protected area is:
  • protected area acts need to be amended to exclude industrial activity
  • Willmore Wilderness Park Act needs to be amended to include no roads, no development, and no off-highway vehicle use
• Immediately designate the following five sizable areas out of the backlog of 31: Bighorn, Elbow-Sheep, Ross Lake, Rumsey, and Wild Kakwa

• Establishing a comprehensive network of protected areas that secure the habitats of threatened and rare species, unique ecosystems, and representative ecosystems
• Developing interagency (at all government levels), industry, and public cooperation and participation in conservation affairs
• Reviewing and strengthening legislation concerning protected areas to provide them with permanent status and to secure their objectives against compromise
• Reviewing and improving the organization, funding, and staffing of government agencies responsible for conservation; providing adequate finances and staff, even in periods of economic stringency
• Reviewing and strengthening training and education at the professional, technical, and user levels
• Promoting research to improve the management of protected areas
• Promoting local support through education, revenue sharing, participating in decisions, complementary development schemes adjacent to the protected areas, and access to resources
• Undertaking environmental education and interpretation programs concerning conservation and ecosystem resources to emphasize the social and scientific values of protected areas
• Evaluating the level of public support for protected areas and identifying the nature of public concerns about protected areas
• Establishing buffers and more sensitively managed areas and management regimes of intermediate intensity bordering ecological reserves, parks, and wilderness areas to prevent them from becoming biologically impoverished islands
• Encouraging those responsible for protected areas research, planning, management, and education to fully investigate and utilize the traditional wisdom of communities located near protected areas and to implement joint management arrangements between protected areas authorities and local communities

Immediate actions for conservation identified in AWA’s position paper:

• Establishment of at least one major wildland recreation area of at least 100 mi2 (160 km2) in each of the major natural regions outside the Rocky Mountains
• Establishment of at least one major Ecological Reserve of at least 10 mi2 (16 km2) in each of the 17 natural subregions of Alberta, with priority given to establishment of areas within the Grassland and Aspen Parkland Natural Regions
• Establishment of parks in all natural regions and closer to population centres to provide outdoor recreation and education areas in all the province’s natural landscapes
• Redrafting of legislation to increase the flexibility to designate and manage a complete spectrum of conservation/preservation/recreation lands

The Land Use Forum submits its report to the government. The report details public concern with regards to lack of provincial guidelines, specifically in these areas:

• Present policies on Crown land
• Need for public education
• Need for better communication
• Need for good comprehensive land-use planning

The Forum reports the following:

• The lack of expressed provincial strategy and guidelines is resulting in frustration, misunderstanding, and inferior planning.
• The public wants more information on the precise roles of the various levels of government and their agencies in the planning process.
• The public is dissatisfied with the lack of public involvement in planning at the local level and the seemingly arbitrary authority of regional planning commissions.
• Municipal governments and planning commissions are frustrated by the lack of direction from senior levels of government on major policy issues such as growth strategy, decentralization, financing, and transport.
• The public is very concerned about the lack of availability of land for recreation. Concern is specifically expressed in regards to (1) the extent and location of public parks, (2) problems associated with recreational uses of private land, and (3) issues relating to access.
• The public is concerned about access to private land for recreational purposes, and landowners are concerned about allowing free public access to their lands under grazing lease. For the most part, landowners are willing to allow recreationists onto their leased land, providing that the owners are compensated for any damages incurred.
• There is widespread public concern over the lack of preservation of unique wilderness and natural areas; protection of sensitive lands; the disappearance of wildlife habitat, specifically in the Eastern Slopes; and cutbacks to areas previously designated as Wilderness or Natural Areas.

• The family farm
• Multi-use of agricultural land
• The use of agricultural land for recreational purposes
• Land use in and adjacent to urban areas as it affects the cost of housing
• Future land needs of Alberta agriculture
• Corporate farms, foreign ownership of land, absentee ownership and communal farming
• The common ownership of land; agricultural processing and marketing facilities
• Land use as it influences population distribution in Alberta
• The extent to which, if any, the historical right of a landowner to determine the use and disposition of agricultural property ought to be restricted

Alberta starts using Integrated Resource Management (IRM) as the paradigm by which to manage Alberta’s public land.

• IRM is based on securing the most favourable mix of uses to achieve maximum benefits; this is accomplished by gathering input from interested and affected parties and then drawing up a plan that will yield the most units of resource output.
• IRM may provide for short-term financial gain, but these benefits are often not sustainable.
• IRM is based on the principle of multiple-use and ignores the need for protection of sensitive ecosystems that cannot tolerate high-impact activities.
• To come up with a good management scheme, one must incorporate scientific knowledge, technology, and ecological principles. For example, cattle grazing may be acceptable on public land if science that respects ecological values and ecologically based management principles is applied. In the absence of such science-based management, however, overgrazing often occurs, resulting in ecosystem damage.