Representatives from the Alberta Government were met with doubt and skepticism on April 18 when they held a private stakeholder session and a public information session in Bonnyville to gather input on the latest draft of the Lower Athabasca Regional Plan (LARP).
The draft outlines a 50-year plan for the region that seeks to integrate industrial activities and development with protecting and managing air, water, and biodiversity, while minimizing land disturbance.
In the plan, new conservation areas will be designated, as well as new recreation and tourism areas across the Lower Athabasca region.
The original draft was created through input by a 15-person committee, which included a variety of representatives with an interest in the region, including environmental groups, industries, and politicians.
Nominees were forwarded by the community or development group they would be representing and members were selected from that short list.
The Lower Athabasca region runs from the County of Vermilion River to the south, and north to the border of the Northwest Territories. It extends to the west to Wood Buffalo National Park and east to Saskatchewan, covering approximately 93,260 square kilometres.
"If you take a look at the map of everybody that's demanding usage of that area, it's a lot," explained Genia Leskiw, MLA for Bonnyville - Cold Lake. "The industrial mineral agreement, the oil agreements, the forestry, the parks - if you start overlaying all the different demands on that area, everybody wants a piece of it, and we have to figure out a way how everybody's going to share and make good use of the area that we have."
"It's an issue that matters," said Kathy Kiel, public affairs officer for Sustainable Resource Development, during the information session. "This is a plan that's looking towards the future of Alberta in the next 50 years and we're really hoping that Albertans will get involved."
With such a large region to cover, however, some of the residents of the Bonnyville area who attended last week's session are feeling under represented, especially with the format the information sessions are being presented in.
In Bonnyville, there was a private morning session for stakeholders that involved presentations and one-on-one discussion with representatives from the government. These sessions were not advertised and media was not permitted to attend.
"I'm disillusioned and disappointed that the ads that the government is paying for don't put the morning sessions out," said Gordon Graves, a well-known local activist and environmentalist. He attended the morning session as a representative for the Beaver River Watershed Alliance.
"I have talked with people who are just thoroughly disgusted that all they knew about was the afternoon open sessions and not the input sessions. That makes me suspicious and I know we shouldn't be suspicious of our government," he added.
A further sense of alienation emerged when Graves considered the level of representation from the Bonnyville area on the original council as well as the different economic sectors that provide the needs for the community.
"They didn't give First Nations accurate and reflective representation, they didn't give agriculture representation at all ... This area was discovered, settled, and founded based on trapping, and they had no representation," he said.
Members of the First Nations are feeling similarly frustrated.
"It's like a dirty insult," said Duane Janvier, member of the Dene Sovereign Nation. "They want us to be Indians to enhance their tourism industry ... There's nothing concerning our nation, like poverty. As usual, we're left out of this whole thing, and this is our territory. All of this is our territory. It's a slap in the face."
Leskiw addressed these concerns, saying although it was impossible for every aboriginal community and every city, town, and village to be represented on the original council, the First Nations were represented by Archie Collins, the chairman of Elizabeth Metis Settlement. Everyone else, she said, can have direct input in the information sessions.
"People get a chance to voice their opinion now," she explained. "So the aboriginal communities are more than welcome to go to those hearings, fill out the workbooks, and if there's something that they strongly disagree on, then there's a chance for them to respond. It's not a done deal, that's why we have 60 days of consultation."
Graves expressed doubt on how much change the public can really effect during these sessions. This is the second round of consultations, while the others took place last fall, and he doesn't see many changes.
"My experience from what is there now versus what was there last fall ... is that they didn't listen to us on a lot of the factors," he said.
Janvier has similar hesitations, unwilling to trust his input at these sessions really holds much weight with the government.
"It's a colonial path," he explained. "Like colonization, that's what's happening, and the Alberta government is leading it. There's no distinction between industry and government.
"The thing is, they're going to wreck it for everybody. It's not just the Indians crying about their land again. It's everybody's problem."
Leskiw believes the older draft and the new draft show significant changes, the result of the last round of consultations.
"If we didn't put any weight on it, why bother having it?" she asked. "If you take a look at the Lower Athabasca Plan that people are discussing right now compared to what was recommended and all the feedback between that plan and where we are now, they listened to people and they made changes."
According to Graves, there are some benefits that have come from the sessions, though perhaps not as the government intended, particularly in bringing together industries like forestry and agriculture which are typically opposed but now share a common complaint.
"I think that's one of the benefits that did come out," he said. "It's a start at bringing the different walks of life together in unison to say, 'Hey wait a second, big government, you forgot us. You haven't looked at the big picture through anything but rose-coloured glasses, you looked at it from an urbanite view' ... It's working together for the benefit of everyone. I hope to hell that the government gets the message."
Leskiw is philosophic about the process.
"You have to give and take," she said. "You have to think of what's best for everybody. Forestry thinks forestry's important, the oil companies think oil's important, people who hunt and fish and trap think that their priority is important. The farmers think they're important. They're all important. But they all want to do it in the same area, so what do you do to balance the needs and wants of everybody that lives in that area?
"We have to share ... It's a balancing act, balancing social needs, economic needs, recreational needs. It's a balancing act and you're going to make some people happy and some people aren't going to be too happy, but it's a give and take situation. We're blessed to be in a beautiful area and the demands in our area are great. We're doing the best we can."
