Regina, Saskatoon 鈥� On Feb. 28 approximately 35 people gathered in Saskatoon for a 鈥渇racking resistance strategic meeting.鈥�
The event was organized by the Saskatchewan Eco Network (SEN), an umbrella group for several non-profit environmental organizations within the province. Later that day SEN held its annual general meeting.
Rick Morrell, executive director of SEN, spoke to Pipeline News by phone on March 19 from his organic food grocery store in Regina called Eat Healthy Foods. Morrell also has an organic mixed farm near Regina.
Pipeline News had asked to attend the meeting in Saskatoon, but was informed the media would be excluded by a decision of the board from this organizational meeting.
The meeting was called for by two of SEN鈥檚 member organizations, but Morrell would not say which ones. When an issue comes to the fore, SEN will form a working group among its membership to address it.
鈥淭here was an assumption, going into the meeting, we were talking about fracking for gas. The nature of the meeting changed and goals of the meeting changed immediately that we saw the issues were different,鈥� Morrell said. 鈥淚 think the other biggest thing is there鈥檚 a lot of research to do. Clearly, the legislation that鈥檚 in place we don鈥檛 feel is adequate to ensure things are done properly, but we don鈥檛 have enough data, yet, to state policy positions or a strategy we can explain. We need to keep on collecting data to see where we need more research to make decisions.鈥�
鈥淚n Saskatchewan it鈥檚 a little different. In most jurisdictions they鈥檙e fracking for natural gas, which there鈥檚 some fairly spectacular side effects to that in terms of water quality and health. In Saskathchewan it鈥檚 fracking for oil, so it鈥檚 a little bit different. The effects aren鈥檛 so spectacular, but there鈥檚 still impacts on the soil around certain wells,鈥� he said. 鈥淭here鈥檚 still the potential for fairly serious contamination of water if fracking fluids aren鈥檛 disposed of properly.鈥�
Morrell brought up the issue of salinity from salt water spills.
The agenda of the meeting included two speakers. One was Dr. Emily Eaton, an associate professor of geography at the University of Saskatchewan. Pipeline News featured her in a story in our August 2014 edition, detailing her research into the impact of oil in Saskatchewan. Eaton spoke on 鈥淔racking for oil in Saskatchewan: risks, impacts and the potential for resistance.鈥�
The other speaker was Regina lawyer Larry Kowalchuk. He represented New Brunswick Anti-Shale Gas Alliance in opposition to proposed fracking in that province. New Brunswick has since enacted a moratorium on shale gas development. Kowalchuk鈥檚 presentation was on 鈥淔racking resistance in New Brunswick, and the potential for litigation to achieve a moratorium on fracking in Saskatchewan.鈥�
Several farmers also spoke about surface rights issues, according to Morrell. Some farmers don鈥檛 want fracking to occur on their land.
There were also concerns raised by landowners about their inability to stop oil and gas activity on their land if they do not own the mineral rights on it.
鈥淭here are farmers that feel like they don鈥檛 want this stuff on their land, and they don鈥檛 have a choice. They either sign the contract or they get expropriated. They feel that if it鈥檚 your land, it鈥檚 your land. You should have the right to say 鈥榶es鈥� or 鈥榥o.鈥欌��
Morrell added those farmers felt bullied as a result.
鈥淭he meeting went on for some hours, and quite a bit was discussed. I think where we ended up was talking about fracking and oil in general.鈥�
鈥淲e need to leave 80 per cent of the oil in the ground if we鈥檙e not going to see the temperature increases that creates severe danger for our future,鈥� Morrell said, noting there is 鈥渃onsensus out there,鈥� about the need to leave 80 per cent of known reserves in the ground, as well as any additional reserves.
Potentially contaminating water for a resource 鈥渢hat needs to stay in the ground is problematic for us,鈥� he said.
鈥淓ven if you only take the oil that鈥檚 easy to get at, we still need to leave a bunch of that in the ground. Tar sands makes no sense to us at all, and luckily right now it doesn鈥檛 make financial sense either. Anything that鈥檚 a more difficult-to-get-at source of oil, there鈥檚 really no point, if we want to be responsible to the future.鈥�
Morrell added, 鈥淭here needs to be a whole bunch more research done on where the fluids are going and what鈥檚 happening to soil around wells that are fracked.鈥�
He spoke of farmers who had damage from 鈥渟alt seepage.鈥�
鈥淎ny kind of extractive industry, whether it鈥檚 oil or anything else, if you can鈥檛 do it without messing up the ecosystem, and messing up people鈥檚 health, you shouldn鈥檛 be doing it, period. This isn鈥檛 the Eco Network, this is my own perspective.鈥�
Of the approximately 35 people in attendance throughout the day, about two-thirds were from urban centres 鈥� Regina and Saskatoon, and one third from rural. About six to eight people came from oil-producing areas, he said.
鈥淥ne thing we didn鈥檛 have was First Nations representation. There was one person, but we expected a lot more,鈥� he said, noting that providing a travel allowance would have helped. That would be resolved in a follow-up meetings on March 20-22 called 鈥淟and and Community: Responses to Resource Extraction in Saskatchewan.鈥�
That weekend would be a much broader-based discussion.
Its March 20 agenda noted, 鈥淎n evening panel open to the public featuring Candyce Paul from the Committee for Future Generations, Myranda Lemaigre from the Northern Trappers Alliance, and other guests TBA.鈥�
The following day would feature 鈥淎 workshop designed to bring together a diverse group of people including Indigenous land defenders, environmental activists, and landowners affected by resource extraction (oil, uranium, potash, etc.) in Saskatchewan. This workshop aims to develop strategic responses to the growing social and environmental impacts of extraction and increase our capacity for collective action.鈥�
Finally, March 21 would have 鈥淎n Indigenous-led workshop addressing the unique challenges that face Indigenous communities affected by resource extraction. The goal of this workshop is to provide a space for those impacted by resource extraction to share experiences and develop a network of solidarity. Participants will also receive training in non-violent direct action and in communicating with the media and allies.鈥�
Dr. Eaton was listed as one of the contacts for the event.
As for the Feb. 28 meeting, when asked why the fracking resistance strategic meeting was held roughly a four-hour drive from the nearest fracked well, and not someplace like Carlyle where people are directly affected, Morrell responded, 鈥淭hat鈥檚 a really good question. It was also our AGM (annual general meeting.) Most of our member groups are around Saskatoon. Some are around Prince Albert, some are in Meadow Lake. But Saskatoon is pretty central to our member groups.鈥�
鈥淚 would say a next step would make sense to start having meetings in those areas. This was to see if our member groups wanted to prioritize this and whether they wanted to put staff time into it and go with it.鈥�
They 鈥済ot to a certain place鈥� with the initial meeting, and he expected more to occur during the March 20-22 meetings.
Asked what the consensus was at the end of the first meeting, Morrell said it was more about stopping climate change.
鈥淚 think there needs to be more analysis about how much land is being affected and how much land is being salinized by fracking, how much water is being affected by either improper disposal or the fracking itself.鈥�
There wasn鈥檛 a decision to focus on coming against deep-well oil fracking. 鈥淭here wasn鈥檛 a decision to have a bunch of meetings to organize to mobilize to go to Carlyle to ban fracking. That decision wasn鈥檛 made.鈥�
鈥淭he discussion isn鈥檛 concluded.鈥�
