Skip to main content
Complete Olympic Games coverage at your fingertips
Your inside track on the Olympic Games
Enjoy unlimited digital access
$1.99
per week for 24 weeks
Complete Olympic Games coverage at your fingertips
Your inside track onthe Olympics Games
$1.99
per week
for 24 weeks
// //

A second Alberta First Nation wants a court to allow it to appeal a review board’s decision that an open-pit coal mine in the Rocky Mountains is not in the public interest.

The Stoney Nakoda Nation has filed a request with the Alberta Court of Appeal to appeal the decision that blocks the development of Benga Mining’s proposed Grassy Mountain project near the town of Crowsnest Pass in southwestern Alberta.

“The (panel) did not properly assess the impact that rejecting the project would have on Stoney Nakoda Aboriginal and treaty rights and economic interests related to the accommodation of those rights,” says the Stoney application.

Story continues below advertisement

The Piikani First Nation filed a similar request last week, as did Benga Mining.

Two other southern Alberta First Nations, the Kainai and the Siksika, are not filing appeals.

“Kainai will not participate in Benga’s appeal,” said a statement from the band.

“Kainai remains concerned about coal projects in the Crowsnest Pass region, and in particular on the headwaters of the Oldman River watershed, and will continue to oppose any other efforts to pursue coal mines in the region.”

The Siksika council made a similar statement.

“As the government of Alberta has not addressed Siksika’s concerns about coal projects in the Crowsnest Pass region, Siksika will continue to oppose any other efforts to pursue coal mines,” it said.

In June, a joint federal-provincial environmental review panel decided the project should not proceed because the threat it posed to southern Alberta’s water supply was too great for the economic benefits it would have created.

Story continues below advertisement

The mine, the company said, would create about 500 jobs during two years of construction and 400 more over its 23-year life. The company said it would pay $1.7 billion in royalties and $35 million in municipal taxes over that time.

But the panel concluded the mine posed too great an environmental risk to the headwaters of the Oldman River from selenium, an element commonly found in coal mines that, in large doses, is toxic to fish.

The panel cast doubt on Benga’s promises to capture up to 98 per cent of selenium released. It said Benga’s assumptions were overly optimistic, its reclamation plans vague and its economic projections overstated.

The review panel also concluded the mine would damage ecosystems and impair the cultural and physical heritage of local First Nations.

But the Stoney Nakoda Nation, which has signed an impact and benefits agreement with Benga, said it was never asked.

The Piikani said that the panel relied on a ruling from an Alberta government office that said consultation had been adequate. As a result, it didn’t dig deeply enough into how blocking the mine would affect the First Nation.

Story continues below advertisement

Piikani Chief Stanley Grier said the review panel shouldn’t have relied solely on the provincial office to get the band’s perspective.

“We were never consulted by the joint review panel directly,” he said. “Nobody speaks on behalf of the Piikani Nation but ourselves.”

He acknowledged some Piikani members oppose the mine, but said chief and council held extensive meetings with band members and elders before making its decision.

“I respect them, but that does not change the chief and council’s decision.”

He said the panel’s reliance on the provincial office to ensure the Piikani were consulted was disrespectful not only to his nation, but other First Nations as well.

Grier called the 25-year projected life of the mine a generational opportunity for his people that could now be lost.

Story continues below advertisement

“That is a legacy opportunity for us.”

Latasha Calf Robe of the Niitsitapi Water Protectors – a group opposing coal development – said concern about the projects among the membership of all First Nations in the region is growing.

“I would say we’re pushing toward 70 per cent,” she said.

Benga said the panel treated it unfairly by telling the company it had filed a complete application with supporting documents, then concluding its environmental information was inadequate.

It also said the panel ignored relevant environmental data while accepting evidence the company calls “non-expert and unfounded opinion.”

The Piikani and Benga applications are to be heard Sept. 9, while the Stoney appeal is to be heard on Sept. 22.

Story continues below advertisement

Our Morning Update and Evening Update newsletters are written by Globe editors, giving you a concise summary of the day’s most important headlines. Sign up today.

Your Globe

Build your personal news feed

  1. Follow topics and authors relevant to your reading interests.
  2. Check your Following feed daily, and never miss an article. Access your Following feed from your account menu at the top right corner of every page.

Follow topics related to this article:

View more suggestions in Following Read more about following topics and authors
Report an error
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

If you do not see your comment posted immediately, it is being reviewed by the moderation team and may appear shortly, generally within an hour.

We aim to have all comments reviewed in a timely manner.

Comments that violate our community guidelines will not be posted.

UPDATED: Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies