The Sheep River as it flows west of Okotoks has 5.6 million cubic metres of its annual 6.7 million cubic metre annual flow allocated to water license holders.

The Province slammed the door shut on water licenses in the South Saskatchewan River Basin several years ago, but what most do not realize is those who hold those licenses now have a valuable commodity.

When the moratorium on water licenses was put in place on the South Saskatchewan in 2006 major rivers like the Bow and Oldman, it also meant no new water licences would be approved on smaller tributaries like the Highwood and Sheep River.

At that time a mechanism introduced in Alberta’s Water Act in 1999 kicked in, which allows existing water licenses to be transferred.

The Province held public consultations on the Water Act in 2000 and on the Water for Life strategy in 2003 in Calgary.

Alberta Environment spokesperson Cara Tobin said many people still don’t know about the water license transfer system, including water license holders, but said they will as the need for water continues to grow.

The Province has created a website allowing people to view where water license holders live in the South Saskatchewan River Basin. The portal also allows people to see how much water the license holder has rights to.

Tobin said this is one way people looking for water can identify where they can obtain a licence. She said the Province also works with those seeking water to find those willing to transfer a portion of their license.

In the meantime, municipalities like Okotoks that are closing in on their water allocation will have to make some tough choices, said Tobin.

“If you don’t have the water, you can’t approve the development,” Tobin said.

The Province is pushing municipalities and all water users to recognize water conservation is a must, said Tobin, and putting a price on water will help achieve a greater respect for water use.

“There’s no more water to be had,” said Tobin. “If there is a cost associated with things people will be more reluctant to waste it.”

On the Sheep River 5.6 million cubic metres of the annual 6.7 million cubic metres of water that flows down its channel has been allocated through water licenses. However, Tobin said much of that water is returned to the river and municipalities typically treat and return 85 per cent of what they draw from the river.

The Province is currently reviewing its water license transfer system. Tobin said they hope to hold more public consultations later this year before deciding how to proceed.

Last year Alberta Environment asked an advisory group commissioned by the minister, the Alberta Water Council and the Alberta Water Research Council to make their recommendations on the system.

The Province heard from the advisory group of 10 people late last summer. Their report gave 15 recommendations, including six suggestions on how the water license transfer system could be improved.

Most of the recommendations state the system needs to be faster, clearer and better understood by the public. In the document the advisory group co-chair, David Percy, the Dean of Law at the University of Alberta, writes a facilitator should be hired to educate water license holders, act as a go-to person when it comes to information on the system, and create a bulletin board where water licenses for sale and those looking to obtain water licenses could advertise. The bulletin board would include volumes of water for sale, the location and price.

“We know there’s lots of ways to find out if land is for sale, but it is very difficult to find out if someone is eve interest in selling their water,” said Percy.

The advisory group also recommended the lengthy approval process needs to be simplified and certain requirements, particularly the need to have a cabinet approved water management plan before a transfer can be approved, should be removed.

License holders also need to know how much water they are allowed to transfer, particularly based on the amount of water they are using.

Percy said the government has done a good job of introducing and starting the controversial system, but now needs to expand.

“We are now ready for the next step,” he said. “We have to make it much better known, much easier and have far less time for approvals.”

However, Liberal Environment critic Laurie Blakeman said the system needs to be scrapped.

“We do not support a water market,” Blakeman said. “We need a different system entirely.”

Blakeman said making water an expensive commodity does not benefit Albertans and added Okotoks is a good example of that.

“I don’t think Okotoks is going to do well under that system,” she said. “Either they are going to get cut off or they are going to pay an awful lot for human drinking water.”

She said the current system is unclear. Although she agrees with the government’s clawback of 10 per cent of any water license that is transferred, she said it doesn’t address issues like when waterways are at low flow periods.

She said there also are not answers for how communities with increasing water needs will pay for water in the future.

“It doesn’t give any clarity for growing communities like Okotoks,” she said.

The Province needs to do away with the legislation that allows those who obtained water licenses first to have control over Alberta’s water, said Blakeman. She calls the “First in time, first in right” (FITFIR) rules archaic and said water should be prioritized based on needs, with people coming first.

“(FITFIR) is from two centuries ago,” she said. “It is still wild west.”

The Liberals are waiting to see where the water license transfer system will go next.

“We are waiting from a report from the government, but it hasn’t come yet,” she said.

Blakeman doesn’t expect the Conservatives will do away with a water market, which she said could force Alberta into a position of selling their water to the United States.

“There could be a NAFTA challenge,” Blakeman said. “If Alberta makes water a commodity it would open up the market and we would have to sell on an equal basis to people outside of Canada. They (the United States) could kill us. They could take our water.”

2 Click Here to 'Like' this post

 Email This Post  Print This Post