[Graeme]

The dispute the entire oil industry is watching

A building boom is under way on this street of stylish new houses, nicknamed after one of America’s wealthiest cities. It’s a required stop for every visitor to this First Nation reserve smack-dab in the middle of Alberta’s oil sands region.

Cobblestone driveways, stainless steel appliances and spacious decks are standard features of the roomy homes. One street over, painting crews are finishing the interiors of another set of new houses as heavy-duty vehicles pack dirt at the next building site. The goal is to get Fort McKay First Nation residents out of the hamlet’s old trailers and houses and into 100 new homes in the next four years.


Now the Fort McKay First Nation has drawn a line in the oil sands. The band is taking legal action to block development of a key part of the proposed Dover oil sands project adjacent to an expanse of reserve land called Moose Lake used for hunting and trapping. The land is sacred territory, Chief Boucher says, part of the band’s last areas not hemmed in by oil sands developments.

Taking its fight to the Alberta Court of Appeal, the Fort McKay First Nation wants to create a 20-kilometre buffer zone on property leased by the Dover project, controlled by global energy giant PetroChina Co. Ltd., and approved for development by Alberta’s energy regulator.

A ruling in Fort McKay’s favour could block development of a rich segment of Dover’s bitumen reserves. And it could force the province’s energy regulator to consider how oil sands projects affect constitutionally protected First Nations’ rights to hunt and fish in their traditional territories, on and off reserve land – and tip the scales in favour of First Nations when it comes to Canadian land-use disputes in Alberta and beyond.

For the energy industry, the widely watched case is pivotal. The legal proceedings initiated by Fort McKay threaten to spill out into the wider world of energy development, and serve as a risk to the oil industry’s growth plans for years to come.

theglobeandmail

[rockdoc123]

classic example of wanting their cake and the ability to eat it as well. The Fort Mackay first nations have become extremely wealthy providing services to the oil industry and count on the development of hundreds of millions of barrels of oil on their reserve land (which they have not blocked development on, surprise, surprise).

The lands they are arguing over are not granted lands but something that First Nations have been pushing for sometime....traditional hunting lands which is crown land not reserve land. Traditional land arguments are difficult....there is no way to prove or disprove their claim and there is no law that can help or hurt their claim.

In any event this is not the "noble savage protecting his land and the environment". I suspect it is simply them looking for a better deal.

[WildRose]

In any event this is not the "noble savage protecting his land and the environment". I suspect it is simply them looking for a better deal.

I don't think so.

Sounds like what they're asking for is quite reasonable. To date, it seems like industry and Alberta government are just not willing to provide the buffer the Fort McKay First Nation are asking for. Remember the old "reclamation" argument? They don't seem to want to commit to that in the case of Fort McKay, either.

“What we are asking for is no different than what the Alberta government recently granted Fort McMurray, which is a buffer zone to separate industrial sites from areas of community activity and residential development,” says Chief Jim Boucher,“The Brion Energy project is within 1200 metres of Fort McKay’s Moose Lake reserve, which is unacceptable.

See below. Even Brion Energy has admitted what is likely to happen to caribou and moose populations in the region after 30 years of tar sands development in the Moose Lake region.

The community of Fort McKay maintains its support of responsible resource development. Fort McKay is only opposed to the portion of the Brion Energy project that is within 20 km of the Namur lake reserve, an area containing critical habitat and important traditional use sites. Brion Energy has predicted that the combined effects of existing and planned projects will result in the extirpation (local extinction)
of caribou and near extirpation of moose within 30 years in the Moose Lake region.

http://www.fortmckay.com/pdf/news/news_20130807a.pdf

[Keith_McClary]

In any event this is not the "noble savage protecting his land and the environment". I suspect it is simply them looking for a better deal.

Yeah, it's all about the "noble white man protecting his land and the environment".

[ROCKMAN]

Rose - I agree with your sentiment in general. Even in Texas we have limits on how close drilling can happen to homes/businesses. And even if we keep the proper distances a company is still responsible for any damage caused on the offset acreage. Texas courts tend to be very protective of such surface owners. But here's the problem: as pointed out the buffer Zone isn't on tribal land. One solution: have the tribe buy the buffer Zone from the company. Not sure what the price tag might be but based on rockdoc's comment the tribe is well off. But it may be worth a lot more than the tribe wants to pay. Which sorta answers the question of what that supposed protection is worth. IOW if the tribe thinks it's important enough for the company to give up the asset's value then it's important enough for the tribe to compensate the company. Kinda simple: if one wants to control what's happens on a piece of land then they should buy it. I'm not unsympathetic but as I described elsewhere I have a similar situation with a surface owner that doesn't own the mineral right. He could have paid more for the property by buying the mineral rights also. But he didn't want to pay the extra. He doesn't want a well drilled on the land. But the mineral owner does: he's a retired public school teacher living on a small pension. Would you deny him the income? Not as easy a call as with that nasty Chinese company, eh? LOL. But the ethics are the same IMHO. Except, of course, the development wouldn't be on tribal land...just offsetting it.

Maybe the gov't could help the tribe buy the buffer zone but there's a conflict: a significant amount of the future lost revenue will be gov't royalty.

[dissident]

I feel sad for Canadian aboriginals taking their legal treaty rights to court and then having like in the BC case the judge telling them that "might makes right". That they lost the settlement war and that any treaty they signed has no legal weight. In other words, a gross abuse of due process. It's ridiculous to have some prick judge pull a ruling out of his ass and that this would be considered justice. Treaty law is not the purview of provincial judges. They have no legal basis to judge these cases. Treaties are between nations and Canada has torn up its treaties with the aboriginals.

It is also grotesque to see Canadian politicians engaging in ethnic activism on the world stage. As if Canada is some stellar example of proper treatment of ethnic minorities.

[Quinny]

I tend to agree with most things you say. Think you are very wrong in this situation!

Rose - I agree with your sentiment in general. Even in Texas we have limits on how close drilling can happen to homes/businesses. And even if we keep the proper distances a company is still responsible for any damage caused on the offset acreage. Texas courts tend to be very protective of such surface owners. But here's the problem: as pointed out the buffer Zone isn't on tribal land. One solution: have the tribe buy the buffer Zone from the company. Not sure what the price tag might be but based on rockdoc's comment the tribe is well off. But it may be worth a lot more than the tribe wants to pay. Which sorta answers the question of what that supposed protection is worth. IOW if the tribe thinks it's important enough for the company to give up the asset's value then it's important enough for the tribe to compensate the company. Kinda simple: if one wants to control what's happens on a piece of land then they should buy it. I'm not unsympathetic but as I described elsewhere I have a similar situation with a surface owner that doesn't own the mineral right. He could have paid more for the property by buying the mineral rights also. But he didn't want to pay the extra. He doesn't want a well drilled on the land. But the mineral owner does: he's a retired public school teacher living on a small pension. Would you deny him the income? Not as easy a call as with that nasty Chinese company, eh? LOL. But the ethics are the same IMHO. Except, of course, the development wouldn't be on tribal land...just offsetting it.

Maybe the gov't could help the tribe buy the buffer zone but there's a conflict: a significant amount of the future lost revenue will be gov't royalty.

[ROCKMAN]

Quinny - You need to expand your thoughts for me to respond. I always appreciate your thoughts.

[rockdoc123]

I feel sad for Canadian aboriginals taking their legal treaty rights to court and then having like in the BC case the judge telling them that "might makes right". That they lost the settlement war and that any treaty they signed has no legal weight. In other words, a gross abuse of due process. It's ridiculous to have some prick judge pull a ruling out of his ass and that this would be considered justice. Treaty law is not the purview of provincial judges. They have no legal basis to judge these cases. Treaties are between nations and Canada has torn up its treaties with the aboriginals.

I don't see this as being a treaty dispute. The lands in question are not reserve lands but are instead crown lands. Treaty law (as you call it) does not come into play. There would be no argument here if it was reserve land as first nations people own the mineral rights on reserve land (similar to freehold rights). The ERCB is the regulatory body that addresses issues with respect to petroleum rights on crown lands and hence this is where the argument should take place. Fort McKay first nations can appeal such decisions and take other legal actions but in the end it is crown land regulated by the province by law.

[Sixstrings]

I don't see this as being a treaty dispute. The lands in question are not reserve lands but are instead crown lands. Treaty law (as you call it) does not come into play.

When did it become crown land in the first place? Did the natives have really good lawyers representing them in the negotiations? Likely not. It's like how Manhattan was sold for a handful of beads.

They're probably right, they probably have been hunting there for thousands of years.

In general, Canada's been a lot better to its natives than we Americans were. Having said that, bottom line is, is it really necessary to turn every last scrap of land up there into ugly (and arguably environmentally devastating) oil sands waste dumps?

Is this not reasonable, why not save a bit of land where there's some wildlife and let it remain reserve? Do they not have enough oil sands up there as it is, you can't even save a little bit of land in the middle of it all?

[Timo]

I don't see this as being a treaty dispute. The lands in question are not reserve lands but are instead crown lands. Treaty law (as you call it) does not come into play.

When did it become crown land in the first place? Did the natives have really good lawyers representing them in the negotiations? Likely not. It's like how Manhattan was sold for a handful of beads.

They're probably right, they probably have been hunting there for thousands of years.

In general, Canada's been a lot better to its natives than we Americans were. Having said that, bottom line is, is it really necessary to turn every last scrap of land up there into ugly (and arguably environmentally devastating) oil sands waste dumps?

Is this not reasonable, why not save a bit of land where there's some wildlife and let it remain reserve? Do they not have enough oil sands up there as it is, you can't even save a little bit of land in the middle of it all?

Where money and oil are concerned, absolutely nothing is sacred, except the pursuit of the Oil Mighty Dollar! Time is running out, and the situation demands sacrifices on everyone else's part for the sake of the expansion and depletion of all the oil that's left in the world. Moose be damned! Oil is unquestionably more important than any undisturbed natural habitat. Oil is unquestionably more important than areas that are already inhabited by other humans. FRACK YOU!!! I bought the mineral rights on your land. Now, get out of my way!

[rockdoc123]

In general, Canada's been a lot better to its natives than we Americans were. Having said that, bottom line is, is it really necessary to turn every last scrap of land up there into ugly (and arguably environmentally devastating) oil sands waste dumps?

Is this not reasonable, why not save a bit of land where there's some wildlife and let it remain reserve? Do they not have enough oil sands up there as it is, you can't even save a little bit of land in the middle of it all?

Alberta's boreal forest covers an area of 381,000 km2 in northern Alberta, the oil sands deposits cover 142,000 km2 of which only 4,800 km2 is surface mineable of which about 700 km2 has been disturbed to date with about 150 km2 undergoing reclamation. The Fort McKay project is not surface mining, it is SAGD which has only about 10% of typical mining surface impact (steam injection facilities and producing wells) and no tailings.

[Sixstrings]

Where money and oil are concerned, absolutely nothing is sacred, except the pursuit of the Oil Mighty Dollar! Time is running out, and the situation demands sacrifices on everyone else's part for the sake of the expansion and depletion of all the oil that's left in the world. Moose be damned! Oil is unquestionably more important than any undisturbed natural habitat. Oil is unquestionably more important than areas that are already inhabited by other humans. FRACK YOU!!! I bought the mineral rights on your land. Now, get out of my way!

Fair enough.

The spice must flow, whoever gets chewed up in the process: polar bears, meese (mooses?), Greenpeace vegans, aboriginals or, once the Russians are all over the arctic -- Canadians in general.