The end is nigh!

[coppertop]

cowman, the key to this is really the safety of the water supply isn't it ? No-one would mind resource extraction if they were assured that the air they breathe and the water they drink and require for other uses is going to still be safe and available. I do not want to see country residential development in my area, simply because I live 10 miles from town, there are two feedlots in close proximity that are both multi-generation family run operations that are farming full time, and quite frankly large scale farming and a bunch of city or town types wanting their own little piece of heaven do not mix. Dealing with the oil and gas industry is something that comes with this territory and we land owners have had to learn the ropes and look after our interests. CBM has not been a factor here yet, and may never be.

[cowman]

And I wonder...will some people ever be satisfied with whatever assurances...that the water supply is safe? Or is that really the issue?
There are a whole bunch of "environmentalists" who I like to call watermellon environmentalists? You know...green on the outside...and very red in the middle? Not really interested in the science of the matter...more concerned that some "evil USA corporation" might be exploiting them?
Really more concerned with political idealism than economic reality?
These are the people who would like to see us living the horse and buggy days again...or at least the great unwashed redneck peasants who actually have to make their living off the land?...not to keen on that role for themselves!
Thank God the majority of Albertans can see through these "closet communists" for what they are and don't support them in any way?

[cakadu]

Cowman, there are an awful lot of judgments and generalizations in your statements. I believe in what I am doing and no amount of money will ever make me feel like it is adequate compensation.

You might not like the beauty of wildlife, green spaces and more importantly open spaces, however some of us really do.

There is absolutely no way that any of these CBM guys have a crystal ball to know that the safety of our water is and will remain intact.

The other thing you are not considering over the long term is that the money will be great until it isn't there anymore. Then what do you do with the land and more importantly, who will buy it? If you don't ever intend on selling the land, then it might be a good deal for some.

The other point is that if it were only the 10 x 10 patch you're talking about that might be one thing, but they have the lease road, need access and all the other stuff that goes along with it. Over simplifying isn't the answer either.

Of course these guys are going to come armed with all the relevant information to make it sound like everything is safe. So too, do the powerline people come with all their studies saying everything is fine if you live in the proximity of a high voltage power line. Doesn't mean that I have to take their information at face value.

[cowman]

Linda: Well no you don't have to believe anything they say, and you can try your best to hold things up.
The fact is most Alberta farmland is only owned for 500 feet and then someone else owns it? No one can deny the owner of that resource at 501 feet from having access to it. As far as powerlines/roads etc. there has to be some method to take that right of way...with just compensation! Now I don't believe in many cases the company/government give just compensation? I think there needs to be higher recognition of what the landowner is giving up for the good of society. In a commercial operation,especially, there has to be a better return to the landowner that reflects more fairness? If a company ships millions of dollars of electricity over a power line or millions of dollars of gas through a pipeline...I believe the landowner deserves some better compensation that reflects the value of the commodity.
But then...I don't make the rules! The people of Alberta do, through their elected officials.

[cakadu]

Cowman, it isn't as black and white as you state it. If wanting a plan - any plan at this point - that will look at things in totality and sustainably is holding things up, then I am guilty of that.

We cannot continue to do things at the pace that we are and not expect any consequences. I would also question whether this is being done for the good of society or if it is being done for the benefit of a few. I don't see my gas, natural gas, electricity or any other costs going down.

I see us shipping raw products out of this province/country and buying back more expensive refined goods. That is not working to the good of society.

[coppertop]

Linda, that is one thing that our new Premier has challenged his government to rectify. He wants to see our goods refined here, and he needs the support of Albertans vs the multinationals to get the process underway.

Have you contacted the new Minister's office with respect to the issues on your own land ? I would suggest a letter if nothing else. Mel Knight is a pretty savvy fellow and in my opinion a very fair man.

[cakadu]

Thanks for the advice copper. I've spent the day thinking about this whole resource/land use issue. The conclusion that I have come to is that Einstein was right when he stated that "You cannot solve a problem with the mindset that created it."

As a province that has chosen to exploit it's natural resources to the extent that we have, we will need to think way, way way outside the box in order to look at a sustainable plan. We persist in treating the land and resources as if they are ours to do with as we see fit. We are merely borrowing them, or better yet, are the custodians for future generations.

Something like 80% of any given watershed is in the hands of 10% of the population. We really need to start taking ecological goods and services into account.

[cowman]

The fact is the majority of Albertans see the exploitation of of our natural resources as a good thing? And I would suggest we have gotten the government we want to achieve that?...hey someone voted them in?
Your powerline is a prime example? I believe that line is being built to supply the American market, which will definitely boost our trade balance? Everyone wins!
Now I'm not sure how you could add value to electricity but for sure you could add value to certain other products? Like NG or bitumen...but at what cost? At the end of the day the bottom line has to be the main concern for the Alberta people? That is only responsible?
For example: If bitumen shipped south returns $35 a barrel net and refining it here returns $30 net...then the responsible thing is to ship it raw?
Encana says they would love to refine bitumen here but the economics say NO! The CEO said if the government wants to make up the difference...no problem!
Now we are talking about a pretty heavey investment? Is it worth it? Who knows!
Yes there would be lots of jobs created and lots of economic activity...but bottom line would we be better off? When the petro chemical industry was created at Joffre, where we process our natural gas...was it a good thing?...well it was if you got a job there...but did it put more money into the Alberta taxpayers pocket? And don't forget it took massive investment from the Lougheed government? Now Klein said the government is out of the business of being in business...and I would assume that is still the rule? I read a little blurb by Stelmach on the bitumen thing...and I don't think he was advocating for one minute putting any money into refineries? It was more of a feel good kind of thing with no meat on the bone!...and in my opinion that is a good thing! I don't want my government buying into all these boondoggles and white elephants!
Its like when the howl was for more packing plants? The government stood firm and said NO, it is up to private enterprize? I think in hindsight we can see that was good? Or we could have wasted a few million like Manitoba!
I personally like to think of government as managers of our resources? Managing them for the benifit of the shareholders(the people of Alberta) and doing the bidding of the shareholders? So far the "shareholders" must think they are doing a fairly decent job...or they would turf them? The fact is there are other parties who advocate more stringent "ecological ideas"...but only a very small minority votes for them? So if you want to change the government you need to do a lot more selling...because the majority of Albertans are quite satisfied with how things are right now!!!

[grassfarmer]

Yeah, Cowman maybe the majority rule but it doesn't mean they are right. Following stupid, self-centred policies that have no regard for sustainability or the ability to sustain human life for future generations may look good for now but it is not good for the future of our society or civilisation as a whole.

Your comment that "its like when the howl was for more packing plants? The government stood firm and said NO, it is up to private enterprize? I think in hindsight we can see that was good?" ..shows your lack of understanding of the industry you are supposidly involved and interested in. As Cakadu stated "You cannot solve a problem with the mindset that created it." You still live in a dream world that free enterprise is king and that without Government involvement everything will be OK. You think Canada is a communist country and were stating that to an American contributer recently. Thank goodness some people have only one vote - they are dangerous things in the wrong hands!

[coppertop]

grassfarmer,I may agree with most of what you have said, but, in my view people who vote aren't half as stupid as those who don't bother to do so. I am not referencing the leadership selection, because it was for PARTY members only, although, many,like cowman, became instant PC's. In other elections, including municipal, people stay away in droves from the polls, then complain bitterly about the kind of government they get.

The resource industries are regulated by the EUB, which, in my opinion needs a complete overhaul, new faces and perhaps some new guidelines. They are now telling the government they cannot keep up with all the applications they receive. Perhaps with a new Minister and Premier, now would be a good time to re-evaluate the terms of reference for the Board and see whether or not it is in fact an arms length regulator.