Special Areas requests for water

[cropduster]

cropduster, isn't there a lot of deeded land in Special Areas and also in the County of Paintearth ? I am aware that there are a lot of grazing leases and that is where a lot of the outcry came from during the time that Tom Thurber was reviewing the Grazing Lease legislation.
The Advisory Council is elected by the citizens of Special Areas but you are correct in indicating that they only act as an advisory to the Special Areas Board that are appointed by Cabinet.
It is a very interesting form of municipal government compared to the traditional MD's and Counties.

[cropduster]

Em,of the 6 million acres it is roughly 1/3 each of crown ,tax recovery and deeded.The 60 million nest egg referred to above is/was generated by residents re-buying the deeds to some of the TR land.But now what to do with the money.One interpretation of the act says the TR land interest is to be `vested in the area`but amazingly the funds are held `safely` in Edmonton.The bureaucrats are careful not to let the citizenry get too much power and that`s where this whole project may run aground.

[cropduster]

I am sure that the $50 million would go along way toward any water initiative for the area, which would mean less out of the rest of the taxpayers pockets, IF the project ever does gain approval.

[cropduster]

Apparently a environmental lobby group is pressuring the government to do an Environmental Impact Study on the proposed water diversion. It will be interesting to see if it becomes a political issue or an environmental one before the decision is finally made.

[cakadu]

Yes, it was announced yesterday that the Alberta Wildnerness Association is asking for an EIA. The proponents of the project are saying that it will turn the desert into an oasis with unlimited development potential.

With a price tag of just under $200 million, we had better make pretty sure that this is going to have some chance for success and at the same time cause minimal harm to the environment and biodiversity .

[cakadu]

I would have expected that an EIA would have been mandatory for a project of that magnitude. If an EIA is ordered it will be interesting to see which agency is involved. Water diversion projects are usually sent to the NRCB, and power dams etc. which involve water diversion are usually joint EUB/NRCB.

[cowman]

Well if $200 million turns it into pardise then I would suggest it is a darned cheap investment? Right now they are doing a feasability study on a high speed train between Calgary and Edmonton and they have pegged the cost at $1.4 to $1.7 BILLION dollars, so 200 million is small potatoes?
By the way the train would only stop once...at Red Deer(actually at a terminal beside the RD airport)! Want a hot real estate tip? Buy up the land around the Red Deer airport(or actually anywhere close to Red Deer)! The county recently bought 250 acres just south of the airport for $6,000/acre!

[cowman]

cowman, I agree that 200 million is a small price for ensuring viability of a huge portion of the province. Many people chose to settle there years and years ago, and through no fault of their own communities are dying out due to a lack of water. The rains of this year should allay some of the fears about the lack of water to share, but I certainly support an EIA being done to ensure that any negative impact will be mitigated as much as possible should the project go ahead.
All too often the dollars are spent to benefit the residents of the large urban centres and rural folks needs get pushed aside.

[SW1-32-5-4]

It gets down to the alocated flow of the Red deer river. Use it or lose it. We are gona use it. we are gona pay our own pumping costs with renewable resourses.The 200 mill initial investment by Alberta taxpayers is less money than the liberals pocketed in adscam.

[cakadu]

Can't really compare apples and oranges. I wish we could be certain that it will ensure the viability of that portion of the province, but wishing doesn't make it so.

When I asked the question about who would move out there if there were water, no one said they would. What if everyone else expects the same - that someone will want to move out there. In many instances, it isn't the lack of water that is making people reluctant to move out there. Far too many people are used to the city type amenities and choices for things to do to keep the family occupied - in other words "urbanized." How many people on the acreages around populated areas make the trip into the bigger centre versus shopping locally?

County of Red Deer did some sort of study on how many times the acreage owners drove into the city for things - it was an average of 11 times PER DAY.

Remember, they are only going to provide irrigation for 20,000 of the 2 million acres out there - that will still leave an awful lot of the area without water and facing the same dilemmas that they are now.

Many communities are dying out and they have more than enough water. The challenges go deeper than that.