KANANASKIS COUNTRY – A bridge over the Highwood River in a largely untouched area of Kananaskis is coming down, but the waters are still muddied on what that means for a controversial logging plan that requires access across the waterway.
West Fraser Timber, which plans to clear 2,000 football fields of forest in the Upper Highwood, confirmed it is beginning work to dismantle the bridge – originally constructed by Spray Lake Sawmills before it was bought out by the B.C. lumber giant in 2023.
It is welcome news to recreationalists and conservationists alike, including the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society (CPAWS). But it comes with a pinch of uncertainty.
“We received that news quite recently and I’m definitely trying to wrap my head around where the company is headed with this,” said Josh Killeen, conservation science and program manager with CPAWS southern Alberta.
“Yes, they are removing the bridge, but what’s unclear is whether they’re planning on building another bridge and what that would look like, and whether they’re still planning on doing the harvest. I don’t know the answer to that at the moment.”
In a statement, director of communications for West Fraser, Joyce Wagenaar, said the company has started remediation of the bridge site, including its removal. Instalment of a new structure is forecasted to take its place by summer 2025.
The Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) launched an investigation into the bridge in the summer of 2023 with the Highwood River considered critical habitat for threatened native trout species, such as bull trout, and the logging company failing to secure a permit to build it.
Department spokesperson Rodney Drover said investigations of this nature can be “complex and wide in scope, and take time to complete.”
“We can confirm that West Fraser is currently removing the bridge, while in consultation with DFO,” he said in an email, noting the DFO could not provide further details at this time.
The investigation and earlier buyout of Spray Lakes temporarily halted the clearcut plan, which was originally slated for winter 2023-24. West Fraser later announced it would prolong the pause to engage with stakeholders.
Wagenaar said the company is still engaging stakeholders to refine the harvest plan.
“Further refinements will ensure environmental stewardship and maintenance of multiple forest management values such as fish habitat, water quality and recreation among others,” she said. “We continue our work on site assessments of watercourses for the establishment of appropriate buffers and crossing structures to protect water values, confirm existing trail locations and public use of the area.”
West Fraser’s current operating plan has clearcutting operations in the Upper Highwood slated for winter 2024-25, but Waagenar told the Outlook this will be paused in lieu of public review of its revised harvest plan during a spring 2025 open house, in advance of a scheduled harvest of fall 2025.
Timing of the removal of the bridge, she added, will be done in consideration to align with government policies to minimize impacts on fish – a concern that is shared by CPAWS.
Bull trout typically spawn in fall, from late August to early October.
“We are a little bit concerned about the process of taking out the bridge at this moment in time,” said Killeen. “This is an important time for bull trout using the Highwood River.”
Environmental fieldwork
Killeen is part of a project team currently conducting fieldwork using publicly funded dollars to build a case against logging impacts on forest hydrology, fish distribution and habitat use, and to monitor erosion and sedimentation on Loomis Creek and the Highwood River.
The $55,000 effort in support of protecting the region for its importance to native trout species and headwaters integrity is being led by CPAWS, with support from geoscience, fish biology and aquatic ecology experts.
Expert analysis through an environment DNA study, commissioned by CPAWS in winter 2023-24 and funded by the Bow River Trout Foundation, has already proven that the watershed is home to critical habitat of Species at Risk Act-listed fish, including bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout.
A subsequent watershed assessment further warned West Fraser’s 1,200-hectare logging plan could not proceed without impacting critical at-risk fish habitat through sediment delivery associated with logging activities.
Logging roads, water crossings and inadequate tree cover due to clearcutting next to streams and higher and lower peak flows associated with flooding and drought pose a “chronic” threat in the form of sediment increases and likelihood of increasing stream temperatures, experts found.
Particularly concerning to conservationists is the plan to log a significant portion of watercourse lengths without any riparian buffers. According to West Fraser’s current plan, 22 of the 36 area sub-watersheds will have over 25 percent of their watercourse lengths left unprotected.
This latest eco-hydrological assessment takes an all-inclusive field-based approach to build on earlier findings and build an “indisputable” case against logging the area.
“As a result of that, we really wanted to go into more detail and to actually be on the ground and documenting some of those potential risks,” said Killeen.
“This work that we’re doing is to really try and do that in a very comprehensive way and to have really high-quality detail about the forest hydrology – the way in which the forest and the water system interact, on fish distribution and on habitat use, as well as erosion and sedimentation risks,” he added.
“Our aim with all that is to really give a comprehensive picture of the state of this watershed right now, its current condition and the potential risks to that state if the logging plan does go ahead.”
Data collection – taken from July until the snow flies – will include spawning surveys, particularly for bull trout, more environmental DNA surveys in tributaries of Loomis Creek not previously analyzed before, snorkel surveys to look for areas where there are young-of-the-year to show breeding population and looking at habitat quality.
It will also look more closely at water quality, mapping out where there are existing erosion events and where risks exist.
“We know that parts of the watershed already have some erosion, possibly from historical access for logging that probably took place in the 1960s,” said Killeen.
“We also have a good idea of where the risks are based on the geology … so, mapping those out and understanding those relative to the planned harvest areas.”
Forest hydrology work will primarily involve monitoring temperature, including that of streams. Native trout species require cold, clean water temperatures to survive.
Who should bear the responsibility?
CPAWS announced in early June that it was fundraising for further study of the Upper Highwood. By the end of the month, it had surpassed its $55,000 goal to support time, labour and costs associated with contracting a consultant.
The request was urgent with the annual road closure to the Upper Highwood reopening June 15 and a short field season before logging operations were scheduled to recommence.
“We felt, given the timeline of the original logging plan, that we needed to get this done this summer. West Fraser planned on harvesting last winter and that thankfully didn’t happen,” said CPAWS southern Alberta executive director Katie Morrison.
“So, it was really important for us to do this right away, and we didn’t have the luxury of time to apply for grants or to find long-term funding. But we also knew this is a place and a campaign that people are really engaged in, so we were able to crowdfund to be able to collect that data before any plans go forward.”
Morrison said she is grateful the public, as well as non-profit organizations like the Bow River Trout Foundation, have stepped up in a big way to support the research endeavor.
But it also raises the question of who should be shouldering the responsibility to understand environmental impacts of clearcutting. Is it the public, the government, or the logging company?
Morrison argues it should be for governments and forestry companies to bear.
“This is the kind of work that should be done on a regular basis to understand the risks to a watershed,” she said.
“This type of in-depth desktop and fieldwork that is happening in the Highwood should really be happening across the board before forest plans are created and approved so that we’re really managing our forestry in a way that avoids these high-risk areas.”
Killeen noted requirements for assessing risk to watersheds are “very basic” for companies operating in Alberta, logging or otherwise.
In Alberta, source water protection is included in several acts and regulations, but challenges persist. To be effective, source water protection needs to happen at a watershed level.
A July report from the auditor general found Alberta’s water conservation system lacking, with most water basins missing conservation objectives and the department lacking processes to assess risks.
“That means we just don’t have clear knowledge of the risks and of the outcomes, too, of these kinds of operations,” said Killeen.
“That leaves us and the public having to fund and do this kind of work, and to be a kind of whistleblower when there’s issues rather than having a strong government regulator to require more detailed watershed assessments like the ones that we are doing and have done in the past, and to require companies to pay for those. That’s something that’s absolutely within their power and should be required for any region like this one where we know there’s species at risk and really important values in terms of water supply.”
The Local Journalism Initiative is funded by the Government of Canada. The position covers Îyârhe (Stoney) Nakoda First Nation and Kananaskis Country.
