“It is time for the Alberta Government to feel the pressure that our communities have been feeling for so long, the tide has turned in our favour,” said Chief Allan Adam of the Fort Chipewyan First Nation, “Thresholds have to be put in place that will protect ecosystem and human health along with the well being of our land.”

The Chief Allan Adam of the Athabasca Chipewyan Dene First Nation and member of the Keepers of the Athabasca brought forward the resolution moved by Chief Janvier of the Cold Lake First Nation and seconded by Chief Laboucan of the Driftpile First Nation. After a few minor additions to the resolution it passed, on Friday, unanimously.

“The cumulative impacts of oil sands development has all but destroyed the traditional livelihood of First Nations in northern Athabasca watershed. The law is clear that First Nations must be consulted whenever the province contemplates action that may negatively affect Aboriginal and treaty rights,” explains Keepers of the Athabasca member Vivienne Beisel (B.A., LL.B., LL.M), ” The province has continued to issue approvals for new developments without obtaining their consent or consulting with First Nations in a meaningful and substantial way. This is in direct breach of Treaty 8 First Nations’ treaty-protected Aboriginal rights to livelihood, and thus a violation of s.35(1) of the Constitution and Articles 26 and 27 of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples’, and international agreement which Canada, along with three other nations, has refused to sign.”

Keepers of the Athabasca is a new non profit organization working to unite the peoples of the Athabasca River and Lake Watershed to secure and protect water and watershed lands for ecological, social, cultural and community health and well-being.
“We came to the Treaty Chiefs of Alberta meeting last week to request an inquiry into the lack of consultation by all levels of government and our peoples regarding the impacts of oil sands development.,” states Chief Albert Mercredi of the Fond du Lac First Nation, located on the eastern shores of Lake Athabasca, “Pollution from the developments do not stop at the political borders between Alberta and neighbouring provinces. The Federal Government and the Governments of Alberta and Saskatchewan have a legal duty to consult and accommodate around the uncertainties associated with development and their impacts on our right to livelihood.”

Gaining the support of the Treaty Chiefs is an important step for the Keepers of the Athabasca, as there are 15 directly affected First Nations reserve-based communities as well as numerous other indigenous communities.

“In passing a resolution for no new oil sands approvals, the chief’s of Alberta have shown great leadership,” says Peter Cyprien, co-chair of Keepers of the Athabasca, who was present at the passing of the resolution, “it is our hope now, as citizens of Fort Chipewyan, that the Government of Alberta and Canada will show the same leadership,”

The Keepers of the Athabasca are committed to completing a community-based watershed management plan based on the interests, rights and needs of the residents living throughout the basin. They have planned to visit communities along the Athabasca River this summer and with the goal of completing a report on the state of the Athabasca River and Lake Basin.

WASHINGTON – Alberta Premier Ed Stelmach asked American business leaders Wednesday not to buy into the “myth” that oilsands production comes at too high an environmental cost, saying attempts to curtail it “don’t make sense.”

But he faced disbelieving protesters at every turn on the first day of his trade visit to the United States, including about 35 environmentalists who passed out flyers to guests arriving at a Canadian embassy reception.

“Stelmach should be back home cleaning up the oil industry rather than running around Washington as an oil salesman,” said Liz Butler, organizing director for ForestEthics, a Canada-U.S. based organization.

“The U.S. does not want Canada’s dirty oil.”

Stelmach told an energy forum that although the myth about the oilsands project has gained some traction south of the border, it would be foolish to restrict the project now.

“There are ongoing attempts in some quarters of this country to slow down or even stop oilsands development. Those attempts don’t reflect reality and they don’t make sense,” he said.

“Even worse, they could serve to jeopardize this country’s energy security at a time when Asian markets are clamouring for oil.”

Stelmach also noted that climate change initiatives such as California’s low carbon fuel standard will penalize energy imports from Alberta.

“That doesn’t serve either of our countries’ energy interests or environmental interests,” he said.

“The bottom line is, in Alberta, we do not proceed with development at the expense of the environment . . . We don’t need to be cajoled into acting in an environmentally responsible manner because we’re otherwise unwilling or unable to do so.”

After the speech, Stelmach told reporters the province is intent on tripling production from 1.25 million barrels a day by 2016.

“We’re here to continue to build the relationship and deliver the message that we’re developing the resources in an environmentally responsible way,” said the premier.

While “there’s a number of things that have to be put in place” to protect the environment.

Air quality and water quality is constantly tested and mostly scores better than most cities, he said.

Environmentalists are particularly critical of Alberta’s oilsands industry because of the large amount of greenhouse gases emitted in the production process.

The project accounts for less than one-tenth of one per cent of all the world’s emissions, said Stelmach, and any facility that emits more than 100,000 tonnes a year is required to reduce the intensity by 12 per cent.

“It’s really all about quality of life of citizens on both sides of the border,” he said.

Back home in Edmonton, the premier’s comments drew an immediate rebuke from the Opposition Alberta Liberals, who said many Albertans want to see a slowdown in the rapid pace of oilsands production.

Liberal environment critic David Swann said describing widespread concerns over oilsands expansion as a “myth” is an insult to Albertans and the premier will likely pay for his remarks in the next election.

U.S. protesters were no less vehement.

“Oil from the tar sands is about our energy past, not our future,” said Liz Barratt-Brown, a senior attorney at the Natural Resources Defence Council.

“The U.S. should not rely on a dirty fuel that results in the destruction of Canada’s biologically rich boreal forest for tar sands mining and drilling.”

Said Tzeporah Berman of ForestEthics: Canada risks becoming an international pariah for promoting the tar sands instead of joining the fight against climate change.”

A U.S. energy bill signed in December says the U.S. government won’t buy fuel from non-conventional petroleum sources that have higher emissions than equivalent conventional fuels.

Environmentalists say the oilsands will create three times as much greenhouse gases because of the huge amount of energy required to extract the resource.

When asked about the danger of U.S. standards becoming onerous, Stelmach said he wasn’t concerned.

“The private sector, the market will determine” sales, he said.

“There’s a lot of demand for oil.”

Analysts peg oilsands reserves at about 173 billion barrels.

“Our goal has always been to work closely with the U.S.,” said Stelmach. “We’re the world’s best trading partners and we want to keep it that way.”

The battle between oil exploration and its inevitable environmental impact is coming to loggerheads in the Great White North, as proceedings in a federal court in Alberta begin tomorrow to determine whether a new oil sands field met critical environment requirements.

The judicial review, currently scheduled to last four days, is over the Kearl Tar Sands project, part of one of the second largest proven oil reserves in the world. It’s located in the Alberta region, about 70 km north of Fort McMurray, and is ultimately expected to produce 300,000 barrels of bitumen, the heavy oil recovered from oil-sands deposits, a day.

Exxon Mobil Corp.-owned Imperial Oil, Canada’s largest petroleum company, is facing allegations that it has not sufficiently game-played the degree and the length of time to which the project could adversely impact the surrounding environment and that a government panel last year was wrong when it said the company had.

The truth revolves around Canadian environmental law, which requires companies wishing to apply for mining permits to have in place concrete measures to address subsequent environmental effects, prior to drilling.

When the original decision by a joint panel of federal and provincial decisions was rendered, it cited an “absence of sustainable long-term solutions” to reverse any impact but ultimately gave Imperial Oil the green light. A similar joint panel approved a Shell Canada Ltd. expansion and a provincial panel approved a Suncor Energy Inc. expansion, only months before in 2006.

The parties suing Imperial Oil, which include the Sierra Club of Canada, disagree with the ruling and say they are holding the company to the letter of the law. Officials at Imperial Oil, however, believe they have met as best as possible current federal law and that the parties suing are exaggerating the level of certainty needed for compliance.

There were 16 days of hearings, held “in a number of venues,” said Imperial Oil Spokesman Gordon Wong.

He added, “From where we stand, we respect their right to challenge the report. We believe the joint panel did fulfill all of its obligations.”

Federal and provincial authorities have approved numerous mining operations over the years. But environmentalists pressing the case claim this one to be “the straw that broke the camel’s back,” according to Sean Nixon, an attorney for EcoJustice, formerly Sierra Legal and one of the litigants in the case.

“The panels have been navel gazing, and saying ‘we’re uncomfortable with this but we’re going to let it go ahead’,” Nixon said.

He added that “after a decade, enough is enough already,” claiming that the amount of leases and approvals are vastly outpacing the panel’s ability to regulate their environmental problems.

Operations to mine tar sand, a mixture of sand, water and heavy crude, pose greater environmental threats than standard oil mining, as it is not only more difficult and expensive to extract, but produces more greenhouse gases than standard oil drilling.

At the same time, for a country that just registered a net loss of 18,700 jobs last month, the largest drop since May of 2003, a lot of jobs and tax revenue are riding on this decision.

Write to John Flowers at john.flowers@dowjones.com

Conservation groups in the U.S. and B.C. developed their campaign model on the B.C. Coast.

American purchasers of B.C. lumber and paper products, such as Home Depot and Victoria’s Secret, were pressured to alter their buying by campaigns targeting them as environmentally unfriendly.

Forest companies here changed their practices when purchasers complained they were tired of buying truckloads of two-by-fours that came with a protester hanging off the back.

NRDC claims that some of the aviation fuel used by airlines such as United is derived from oilsands. Extracting and refining oilsands oil generates more heat-trapping global warming pollution compared with conventional oil, the group claims.

In an interview Thursday, Liz Barratt-Brown, senior lawyer for the organization, said the marketing campaign is focusing first on airlines in the Chicago and Denver areas. Those two U.S. cities are prime markets for aviation fuel derived from Alberta’s oilsands, she said.

“The government of Alberta and especially the industry there may not have time to listen to U.S. environmentalists. But when their customers start asking them questions, then they respond,” she said.

“Part of our effort here is to start engaging in the debate over the future of tar sands development and the use of fuels by the aviation industry.”