When is our land, not our land?

[cakadu]

Emrald has brought up a very salient point in another thread - the loss of ag land, particularly along the #2 corridor. As producers, we are to abide by a great many regulations, have to stay 30 meters back from waterways with fertilizer and/or manure, abide by the species at risk laws and the list is all to familar to us. We have to do nutrient management plans, environmental farm plans, food safety plans, keep records of everything we do on the farm etc. etc. Not that these are bad things in and of themselves, it's just that the landowner and/or producers are expected to abide by these regulations, with no additional compensation for doing so.

Yet, at the same time, oil companies are allowed access to get the resources, coalbed methane is increasing by epic proportions, pipelines are running all over the place and now new power lines are being proposed, with seemingly no care for the environment or the footprint we are leaving behind.

As many of you may be aware, there is a proposal for a new high transmission line to go from Genesse to south of Calgary.

Just like the oil leases, there will be no recourse once the EUB decides on where this thing has to go.

Agricultural land is taken out of production for rights of way, habitat is lost, wildlife corridors disrupted etc.

How then can they keep telling landowners that they have to do all they can to protect the land and the resources - expect us to do it with no additional money - yet continue to let all these other things happen? It really makes one wonder what on earth would make us do our part, when it doesn't appear there are many others who are? There is a huge disconnect here.

[silverback]

Linda, environmental farm plans are voluntary, nutrient management plans only apply if your operation produces 500T of manure per year, so those aren't regulations that all operations must follow. I agree that all users of land should abide by the same set of rules. The provincial land use policies have no teeth which is something that I have made noise about for years. They only are guide lines .
The need for power will certainly dictate what happens with transmission lines, but I would suggest that before the fact is the time for landowners to unite in what they want to see in any right of entry agreements.

[cowman]

There always has to be some way that land can be expropriated for the good of the whole? In other words John Doe can't hold up a highway just because he wants to keep his little bit of paradise?
However there also should be fair and just compensation? Which I would suggest doesn't always happen? Especially in Alberta, where the government almost always sides with big business?
Personally I think the oil companies get a relatively free ride with their lease deals and especially their pipelines! They put a caveat on your land for a pipeline...but pay no rent? You will never be able to do anything with that land as long as the caveat exists, which can be for decades, even when the pipeline hasn't been used for years! Ever tried to get a caveat taken off? Costs time and money.

[cowman]

good points cowman. Municipalities also have the right to expropriate land for utility right of ways and road ways that are for the good of all citizens. Not many municipalities go to that extent but in my own municipality a road widening project was literally narrowed down and a public walkway was cut off at two properties, then back on track. People using the walkway have to walk out onto the roadway infront of the two properties, the municipality could have expropriated the land, but the one property owner was the brother of the town mayor and it would have caused a lot of publicity that wasn't too appealing !!!
I have a pipeline right of way on my land that sinks more each year. The company has been allowed to abandon the line even though it crosses a creek.

[cakadu]

Emrald, you're right about EFP being voluntary and AOPA applying to certain sized farms and I don't have a problem with them on the whole. What I do have a problem with is the fact that landowners are "charged" with doing all of these good deeds on the land while all around there are things happening that might not be in everyone's best interests.

I do agree cowman that you can't hold everything up, but I do wonder why we can't protect our little piece of heaven? A person works hard to make payments on the land, be as environmentally sustainable as possible, protect wetlands and riparian areas, as well as natural areas for wildlife and to preserve biodiversity and none of it matters if the big boys come calling.

I'm curious to know, if your grandkids were the "canaries" between two high voltage transmission lines, would you still be inclined to say you can't hold up progress and do it for the good of all?

Problem is that this new transmission line likely isn't being built to provide electricity to Albertans at a lower cost, it is being built to provide the Amercians with more electricty.

We have all of these things happening at once and no one knows what the cumulative effects over the short and long-term are going to be. Yes, they can do their best estimates, but I'm sure in your years in the oil patch cowman you know that things don't always fracture the way they think they will, blow outs happen, and the list goes on.

Yes, the neighbors will have to get together to discuss this and communities will have to get together as well. I don't want this thing coming through my backyard, wiping out trees, a riparian area and one of the few wildlife corridors between the Red Deer and Medicine Rivers. There are 160 miles of drainage ditch out here, much of which comes through our property in the spring via a seasonal creek. If they take out trees and alter the path of this creek, our land will be subject to yearly flooding, for which we will receive no compensation. We have a fishpond and a cabin in the area as well, which will be prone to flooding.

They do already have an existing right-of way with a transmission line one road over from us. Problem is if we don't want it, it has to go somewhere. Quite frankly I am not too keen on becoming a canary to see what living between 2 high voltage lines can do to you or more importantly, to my animals.

When do we get to say that enough is enough and we are entitled to the quiet enjoyment of our lands without any recourse when some big company comes knocking?

When I see what we are doing to the land and the environment all in the name of progress, I just have to shake my head and wonder if we have any idea of what we are actually doing?

[cowman]

Well Linda, I am sure you realize one way or the other that transmission line will be built...come hell or high water?
The powers that be have decided that.
You might mobolize the troops and make enough of a stink to get it moved somewhere else, but when big money is involved you know it is going to be built?
The company building it will do it with the least cost and trouble that they can? In the long run if there is too much opposition they might decide to move it to a more remote area?
Your best bet is fight the good fight and hold out as long as possible, but at the end of the day you might lose anyway? If that is how it is then you want to get maximum compensation?
In case you haven't realized it this provincial government really doesn't care very much about things like the environment or riparian areas? The bottom line is always money and big business? And I would suggest to you that the majority of Albertans support this government and its policies? They give lip service to environmental issues but that all goes out the window when money comes into the picture? We are a pretty materialistic society?

[cowman]

Different agencies bear responibility for various aspects of development. Non energy natural resource projects are under the mandate of the NRCB, while AB Environment is responsible for many projects relating to the environment and the feds are responsible for projects involving navigable waterways. In a large project such as a transmission line I would suspect that several agencies will be involved in portions of it.

The Dunvegan Power project came under the joint authority of the EUB and NRCB as it involved the diversion of water.
If an EIA is required for this transmission line then the public will have opportunity to make presentations either at a public hearing or to the applicable agency.
Any such presentations must include conclusive evidence supporting the position of the intervenor. EG: Its not enough just to say ' I don't want the project in my community', you must also include why and support that position with facts.

[cowman]

With all due respect emerald the EUB and NRCB are in fact toothless tigers?
What big business wants big business gets! It is amazing how the rules are written in stone for Joe Citizen but not for the powers that be? All it takes is to know the right person or be cozy with the Conservative party in Alberta?
Rules and laws look real good on paper but are virtually meaningless in Alberta!
The EUB has one goal! Get that well drilled no matter what, get that transmission line built no matter what? The NRCB makes descisions and are over ruled at a higher level because someone had some pull within the government? This is the reality of Alberta politics...everything is for sale if you have the money and influence!

[cowman]

the decidion making of the NRCB is two fold. Approval Officers and Inspectors make decisions in the field on applications and enforcement. If the decision is appealed and a review hearing requested, and if the NRCB Board agrees to a hearing then the Board has power to overturn or amend the decision if they feel the staff erred or did not take all issues into account.

The only authority higher than the Board is the court and decisions will only be overturned there if the Board errs in law or jurisdiction. Government will never attempt to influence a decision of the NRCB, although a couple of MLA's have been fairly vocal in the media about some decisions.

The EUB is funded in equal parts by government and industry, the NRCB gets no funding from industry.

[farmers_son]

I have dealt a great deal with the EUB and the ERCB before that. Cowman's assessment of the situation is correct.

While emrald1 is stating factual information the reality is that these government agencies do have a built in prejudice to see the project proceed, assuming the government wants the project to proceed.

In effect these agencies do not operate at arms length from government and merely serve as a bureaucratic level between the public who are more often than not farmers and the minister who is following the wishes of cabinet.

[farmers_son]

farmers_son I don't know if you have had dealings with the NRCB or not. I know a bit about their process and it is true they are created by government but they must act in an arms length manner. Any government official attempting to influence the decisions of these Boards could find it to be a career limiting move. Administrative tribunals are the next form of justice to the courts and are bound by the rules of Natural Justice which means fairness.

It is obvious that there are going to be those who applaud decisions made by these tribunals and those that are very unhappy with them. Quasi Judicial Boards such as these usually have a very difintative line between their operations and the Board side of their organizations to ensure that Board members are not involved in the decision making of the operations staff, and are only engaged in making decisions that are the result of appeal hearings.

The Administrative Tribunal is similar to the Subdivision and Development Appeal Boards within the municipal system in that the tribunal may amend or vary decisions made by the lower authority.

[farmers_son]

in addition to my previous post I do want to add that it is mandatory for all Board members of these tribunals to disclose annually to the Ethics Commissioner, all their financial and business dealings, including those of their spouse and children.They cannot hold stock in any operation that is remotely connected with their mandate. There are many stakeholders for these Boards including Municpalities, Health Regions, Non Government Organizations and the industries affected by their regulatory role. To quote a recent article, it is all about balanced decision making in the public interest.

[cowman]

Well emerald I will relate a true story told to me by a mid size feedlot owner. He wanted to expand and jumped through all the NRCB hoops. Part of the problem was he needed a certain land base to spread manure on? The NRCB insisted he use all his land base...he had some remote very rough pasture land!
Anyway he played the game but never put the manure on the remote pastures but instead put it on the better land and grew corn for silage! He told me they never check anything and are basically just a joke that you have to deal with! He said they don't have a clue when it comes to the economics of a situation! He was pretty contemptious of the NRCB.

[farmers_son]

Government exerts influence over these boards by controlling who are the board members. I cannot believe that the Province would sit back and watch the EUB make orders and decisions contrary to Governments wishes. The people who get chosen for these jobs may have expertise in their fields but they would also be regarded as supporting the general directions and policies of the governing body or they would not get the job or they would quickly be replaced.

[farmers_son]

I am not sure about how EUB members are selected, however the NRCB Board is relatively new, having been appointed in 2002. I was involved on the municipal side of things with respect to the AOPA legislation and know how the process evolved for appointing Board members. The current Board were selected from a fairly large group of folks and my understanding is that some of the current board had numerous letters of recommendation from folks from all walks of life across the province, attesting to their standing in the community, their honesty and their ability to think for themselves. If you check the NRCB website you can read the biographies of the Board members and what their backgrounds are. I do think it is a bit unfair to surmise that these folks will jump through government hoops, if you read some of the decisions made by the Board you will see that they have denied applications that would likely have been a feather in the hat of government. I am thinking of the Glacier Power application for one.

There are Board decisions where the Board has overturned approvals done by field staff when they felt that there was inadequate information regarding certain issues, so I don't know how that relates to doing governments bidding. I would think that the members of both the EUB and NRCB Boards have proven track records of community service and common sense decision making or they wouldn't be there. Doubtful if Cabinet just plucked them off a park bench somewhere.

Cowman, you cited one feedlot owners contempt for the NRCB, and his comments about them not checking to see where he spread manure. He is required to keep records of where he spreads manure, and if he is not spreading it where he says he is, then he is not adhering to the legislation. I have difficulty with his blaming the regulatory body if he as an operator thumbs his nose at the regs.
Almost like somebody speeding and making fun of the cop because they didn't catch them. Doesn't exhibit much between the ears thats for sure !!
Industry has a whole has had an issue with the NRCB doing routine monitoring of operations, which is what they are supposed to do, so if you have one feedlot owner complaining because they don't check up on him, and the rest of industry whining because they are checking up on them, how in hell is any regulatory body supposed to please everybody. Municipalities want the NRCB to ensure that all operations adhere to the conditions of their permits in order to have as little conflict as possible with their neighbours.
I have been told that the NRCB does not send inspectors out to lurk behind every bush spying on operators, they respond to complaints; monitor existing conditions and also check on NRCB permits to ensure that they are in compliance.