As information sessions on the preferred flood mitigation option for the Springbank Off-Stream Reservoir (Springbank Dam) wrap up, Springbank area residents are left with the impression the province has its mind made up.
“I’m absolutely outraged,” said Springbank landowner Lee Drewry, member of the vocal opposition movement Don’t Dam Springbank.
His anger is not only in reference to the proposed dam but the short notice on the information sessions given to stakeholders – many of whom are on summer vacation.
Many at the Wild West Event Centre in Springbank echoed his sentiments on Tuesday evening.
“There needs to be more research and due diligence on the part of the NDP government,” said Tracey Feist, who was raised in the agricultural community.
“The best area for the dam is the McLean Creek area,” said Feist, who lives in Bragg Creek and remains concerned the Springbank Dam option would offer no protection to her community.
Adam Johnson with Alberta Transportation listened to resident concerns, answered questions and shared the project updates – including project scope changes, Tuesday evening.
He confirmed the province is not looking at McLean Creek as an option – and the best alternative for flood mitigation is the Springbank option.
Johnson said the province is currently working through landowner negotiations, but would not elaborate.
The estimated cost of land acquisitions is $140 million – a figure that Springbank Coun. Jerry Arshinoff said many of his constituents believe is not based on fair market value; the dam would consume 3,610 acres of lands but the province will offer to acquire a total of 6,800 acres of lands owned by affected landowners.
“I have yet to find anyone who is not opposed to the dam,” said Arshinoff.
“Many people also feel McLean Creek has not been fairly compared in terms of cost and benefits.”
The Springbank Dam is estimated at $372 million and to be completed by 2022 versus McLean Creek at $406 million, estimated to take six years for completion.
Arshinoff added that among chief concerns, aside from the “detriment to the community of Springbank” the dam would cause, he also questions the $21-million estimate for roads and bridges and the efficacy of the dam itself – based on his own research through independent engineering consultations.
According to Johnson, the Springbank Dam “works in tandem with the Glenmore Reservoir. Between the two of them, they would be able to provide the capacity for an event like the flood of 2013.”
Jumping Pound residents and neighbours Tim Barnes and Holly Nichol were both in attendance Tuesday evening – each concerned that the decision is being steered by bureaucracy over best interests.
“I feel that the government hasn’t listened to the stakeholders who will be most impacted – the landowners (in Springbank),” said Nicoll.
Next steps include roughly a yearlong process for environmental impact assessments to be conducted – on the federal level by Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA) and to be reviewed at the provincial level by the National Resources Conservation Board (NRCB).
Bill Kennedy, general counsel for the NRCB, said an extensive hearing process some time next year would provide the opportunity for stakeholders to formally support or oppose the project.
Environment Minister Catherine McKenna was ordered earlier this year by a federal court to rule on whether or not an independent review panel (separate from the CEAA) should be conducted on the dam. She recently determined that it should not.
Tsuut’ina First Nations has also vocally opposed the project.
