“Politics, potatoes & prized land” and water
Dear Editor:
The article by Dave Mabell (Lethbridge Herald Sep 23 2010) identified several important issues regarding an imminent Cabinet decision about selling 100 quarters of public land to an enterprising potato producer. It mentioned loss of native prairie habitat for federally and provincially listed species at risk, loss of livestock grazing and outdoor recreation opportunities and the risk of political patronage given the lack of open and transparent public process in decisions about public land sale.
That much of Alberta’s native prairie is already lost to cultivation and settlement was also touched upon in the article. Recent data suggests native grassland constitutes only about five percent of the province, and yet supports approximately half of the rare ecological communities, 40% of rare vascular plant species and 70% of mammal, bird, reptile and amphibian species considered at risk or may be at risk. Recognizing this sobering fact, many organizations and individuals are hard at work to secure native prairie on both public and private land through land purchases, easements and participation in planning processes including the South Saskatchewan Regional Plan under the Land-use Framework. Approving the “species and prairie to spuds” land deal would be a fundamental betrayal of trust that Cabinet is serious about taking advice from the Regional Advisory Council it has established for this region.
Another aspect of this controversial proposal is the implication for water management in the South Saskatchewan River Basin. Potatoes grown under irrigation are one of southern Alberta’s most water-greedy crops requiring about 40 cm (16 in) of water during an average growing season. Potatoes also demand large inputs of fertilizer and pesticides. One hundred quarter sections of potatoes would consume an annual water allocation of about 20,000 acre feet, greater than the City of Lethbridge’s annual diversion of 16,000 acre feet, most of which is returned to the river immediately downstream.
The public lands being considered for sale are north of the South Saskatchewan River below the confluence of the Bow and Oldman Rivers and are not within an established irrigation district. It is not even clear if the lands are suitable for irrigation. That aside, the Bow, Oldman and South Saskatchewan subbasins are closed to further allocation because of water scarcity, stressed aquatic ecosystems and historical overallocation. The proponent of the project would therefore need to acquire water.
SLM Spud Farms plans to obtain water from the Bow River Irrigation District (BRID) by constructing a siphon across the Bow River, digging an irrigation distribution system and expanding the District. That this is being considered suggests BRID has significant amounts of water allocation that are excess to its needs. Given that the lower Bow River below BRID’s diversion is degraded, it would be prudent public policy consistent with Water for Life and the work of the Alberta Water Council to identify opportunities for allocating some of this excess allocation to meet instream flow needs, instead of increasing the risk of water scarcity and aquatic ecosystem degradation by significantly expanding potato production.
Concerns about water scarcity and the degraded rivers aside, if additional potato production is demanded by the market, there is already ample cultivated land in or adjacent to irrigation districts to meet that demand for years to come.
The proposed deal appears to be an attempt by a few to gain considerable private profit at public expense. Native prairie, species at risk, healthy rivers, scarce water resources and sustainable livestock grazing are of much more value to our society than more potato chips.
These issues should be enough to give Cabinet members pause about approving the sale.
Yours sincerely
Cheryl Bradley
