Mackenzie pipeline 'footprint' could threaten wildlife: report
Unique sanctuary established in 1961
ANDREW MAYEDA, Canwest News Service
Published: Tuesday, August 19
The Harper government has been warned that the ecological "footprint" of the proposed Mackenzie Valley pipeline on an Arctic bird sanctuary that protects migratory birds and at-risk species such as polar bears could exceed the threshold deemed acceptable by Environment Canada, newly released documents reveal.
Conservationists fear the pipeline, which would carry natural gas from the Mackenzie River delta in the Northwest Territories to markets in the rest of Canada and the United States, could threaten the Kendall Island Bird Sanctuary, a 623-square-kilometre patch on the coast of the Beaufort Sea.
The sanctuary, established in 1961 by the Diefenbaker government, is the only protected wildlife area in the Mackenzie delta region. In addition to birds such as snow geese and tundra swans, it is home to at-risk mammals such as grizzly bears, polar bears and wolverines.
Polar bears are among the at-risk mammals found at the Kendall Island Bird Sanctuary in the Mackenzie delta region.
The Canadian Wildlife Service, Environment Canada's conservation branch, recommends that the physical impact of development be limited to one per cent of the sanctuary's area.
At a hearings in Nov. 2006 before a federally appointed panel reviewing the project, Canadian Wildlife Service regional director Bill Gummer said the impact was expected to be less than one per cent if industry conducts development "in a manner which reflects the highest standards of environmental practice."
However, documents obtained by Canwest News Service under the Access to Information Act suggest government officials had concerns earlier that the footprint of the pipeline could exceed the one-per-cent limit.
"Should future subsidence and destruction of habitat through flooding be linked to the project and included in calculation of footprint, there is a concern that the one-per-cent threshold may be surpassed," states a Feb. 7, 2006 draft briefing note attributed to Giles Morell, assistant director of the Northern Oil and Gas Directorate at Indian and Northern Affairs Canada.
The Harper government took power on Feb. 6, 2006. According to the briefing note, Environment Canada officials identified flooding caused by soil subsidence as a concern in fall 2005.
At the Nov. 2006 hearings, Gummer said subsidence was a "major concern," but added there was no consensus on how much area will be affected.
More recent documents suggest Environment Canada staff have since estimated the threshold may have already been surpassed.
The release of the documents comes as Prime Minister Stephen Harper prepares to travel to the Mackenzie region to tout his government's commitment to Arctic sovereignty.
In last fall's throne speech, Harper promised to implement an "integrated northern strategy" focused not only on strengthening Canada's sovereignty, but also the environment and the economic and social development of aboriginal peoples.
Under the pipeline proposal, three natural-gas production pads will be located within the sanctuary; above-ground flow lines and buried pipelines will also pass through it. The consortium of companies backing the project has promised that the environmental impact will be low. However, officials worry that gas extraction could cause soil to cave, triggering permanent flooding.
In a briefing note dated Dec. 29, 2006, Morell points out that the Canadian Wildlife Service can refuse permits for development. Permit approval in the Kendall Island bird sanctuary "has been identified as a potential show stopper for the (pipeline project) and is one of the top concerns for the proponents."
Should the project be shelved for environmental reasons, "the competitiveness of Canada will be put into question, with negative implications for Canada's investment climate," the note continues. "Canada could also lose an opportunity as a member of circumpolar countries to become a global model for sustainable development in the Arctic."
The documents reveal tensions between Indian and Northern Affairs, which issues exploration licences and works with industry to spur development, and Environment Canada, with its conservation mandate. "INAC policy on oil and gas leasing within (the sanctuary) remains a key concern for EC," states the Jan. 2007 note.
To "offset" development within the sanctuary, Environment Canada has proposed declaring other areas as protected. But Indian and Northern Affairs is concerned that "lands with high resource values are not sequestered indefinitely."
More generally, Environment Canada has floated the idea of developing "delta-wide land-management approach," but Indian and Northern Affairs fears such an approach "could add to the burden of obtaining regulatory approvals, increase costs and limit exploration and development."
Canada needs to take a more forward-looking approach that balances development and conservation, said Peter Ewins, director of species conservation at World Wildlife Fund Canada. "The sanctuary was not really protected as a first measure, when it should have been," he said, noting that the sanctuary has been extensively drilled for oil and gas since the 1960s. "And that's really the take-home lesson: you get into these very costly and difficult discussions and problems and delays, if you don't protect the key places first and then allocate industry develop elsewhere."
The Mackenzie pipeline was supposed to be completed next year, but the start date for production has been pushed back to 2014. In May, the review panel said it would not complete its environmental assessment until 2009.
The prospect of oil and gas drilling in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge has stirred controversy for years, and has resurfaced as an issue in the U.S. presidential race.
© The Gazette (Montreal) 2008
http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=0b82625c-79a8-4...
