Article on Fort McMurray

Hello all.

It is not the seismic activity in the Marie Lake area that causes me the most concern. It is the possibility of utter destruction to follow that keeps me up at night. I have attached a link to an article from Explore Magazine that I read about the Ft. McMurray project. The article is well titled as Dirty Secret. I contacted the magazine who provided me the PDF to share with others.

After the initial shock and sadness about what has already been destroyed in Ft. Mac, my worst thought was that this would soon spread to other areas of Alberta. Then I saw the post on here about the Marie Lake project....I didn't expect it to happen that soon.

Click the link below and then on the file name that should appear:

www.box.net/shared/cmxtsi41l1

P.S. Special thanks to Gunner83 on web file sharing.

I am not trying to hijack your post Snapfisher.It is the most informative post that I have read on this forum and should be of grave concern to every outdoorsman that reads this forum.
As of this time 64 readers have read this post and no one has responded.You should all be ashamed for hiding your head and your opinion of the destruction being caused to all of Canada and in particular Alberta by the Oil Companies ,Federal Government and the Alberta Government.
Between the three different players in the Oil industry they kill and destroy more wildlife and habitate in one day than all of us could destroy in 10 years.
For the last two years the outdoorsmen and outdoorsladies on this forum have been hollaring bloody murder and sending letters to their MLAs about the IMHA if they hear a "rumour" that a Metis has killed a deer or a moose for food.
Where are all these self serving individuals now when the facts are in front of you of the carnage being impossed on you and all of your families.
Are you all scared of Big Companies and Government???
You Betcha!!!!!!!!!
Have a great day.
Thanks for the great post Snapfisher.

Good article.

It’s kind of ironic if you think about it. We are burn natural gas and coal to produce electricity which is required to provide the huge amount of energy that is required to extract the oil to be burned in vehicles? The article states we burn a barrel to produce two barrels? Uhmm, that makes a lot of cents… I’m meant sense. Its like exercising at the gym in the morning an then going to a fast food joint at eating half a dozen greasy burgers in the afternoon!

It makes one wonder. We let these oil companies come in and do as they please for and demand nothing in return with respect to building schools, hospitals, parks, and infrastructure (roads, bridges, cleaner energy power plants – nuclear? etc.). When the American oil companies leave we will be left with northing more than a toxic wasteland and not much of a economy. The environmental requirements set forth by both the provincial and federal governments are an absolute joke. Reclamation plans and care for the environment is at the very bottom of the totem pole. How much will it cost? How fast can we build it? Where can we cut costs? These are the only questions asked at any oil company board of directors meetings prior to a project approval!

Everyone in Alberta including myself is enjoying the financial benefits right now but that’s near sightedness. I’m not an enviromentist trust me. One might say I’m a hypocrite. I drive a ½ ton truck, I own a 2-stroke outboard, I own fair size house, my work is related to the oil patch, I hunt, and I fish. But I have decided to make some big changes. My truck is 12 years old I’m selling it and down grading to a more fuel efficient small size pick-up. I’ve just bought a 4-stroke outboard to replace my 2-sroke. Our house has the highest efficiency furnace, hot water tank, windows/doors, insulation, appliances, and light bulbs that money can buy, we just had solar panels installed on our roof, and I’ve been taking night courses so I can change my career path. Is this perfect? Absolutely not but I think every little bit helps.

I also think change is the key. I just hope our governments realize this.

Thanks for sharing the article Snapper. Its unfortunate but big oil always wins.

And the fear mongering continues...
With out a doubt one of the most biased and unknowledgable articles I have ever read...
Yes we do have to control growth in our province and keep an eye on our environment,, but lets do it out of knowledge, not fear mongering...
Be careful of what and who you back people the antis are out there in many forms,, some people are just anti everything,, give them a foot in the door and look out....

Sure the article is subjective to the writer and those interviewed however the Big Oils opinions are subjective as well and accomidaite there best interest and not the environments.
The cases of cancer down stream, would you want yourself or family exposed to that environment?.

Dont get me wrong I think were furtunate to live in such a prosperous province but it does come at a cost much larger than $$$.

Thanks all for your return posts.

Walleyes, this is not posted out of fear mongering. I'm not sure why you would post what you did. If you are not concerned about the impact of this then just say so and leave it at that. I truly hope you or none dear to you are physically effected by the results of these projects. Good luck to you.

I posted what I did because the article in question is like I said very biased,, it was by no means an attack on you for posting it,,, I can understand why possibly like you many people would take everything said in it as truth and I'm sorry but its not..
The writer is obviously an environmental activist trying his hardest to convince the world of this doom and gloom but many of us that work first hand in the industry know that for the most part what the author is saying is hogwash or more obviously blown way out of proportion. Now I'm not going to sit here and start pulling pieces of his article apart and analyzing it for you but please get more informed on the practices, liabilities and truths of the industry before you take what he says as the absolute truth..
What is happening to some communities down stream of these plants is unfortunate but there are other factors to take into consideration.
First you have a peoples that for the most part start smoking tobacco at a very young age and continue on for the rest of their life. Take into consideration the fact that fresh vegetables are basically non existent which most people know are very important to fighting cancer,, this may not seem important to you and I because of its availability to us but these people go months without fresh vegetables.. Now consider the fact that these people drink water from, eat fish from a river that on its own contains mercury.. Mercury is a natural occuring element in a lot of our rivers.. I'm not saying that industry is not adding to it but most of it is natural occurring. And I know they are saying its getting worse since the mines have opened up but consider the fact that since those mines have opened up so have their comunities and their ability to get to town and what comes with that, more tobacco, more alcohol more pop, more packed food do you see the trend here. Now have you ever been to Fort Mac in the summer when the sun hits the sands on the side of the river and the oil starts seeping out and soaking into the water ??? I have its not a pretty site.. Has anyone ever considered what effect this might have on a river and its water...
Now again I'm not going to sit here and say industry has done no damage to the area,, but I will tell you there are other issues at play here and looking at the situation from one point of view is wrong, it is easy to pick out big industry because they are making money but please get more informed before backing any group that uses such tactics to put their point across. We as gun owners, hunters, fisherman should be fully aware of the tactics these people use and we should know for the most part how valuable their information is,, they attack us daily using the same tactics...
Again this is not an attack on you or anyone that believes that industry must improve their ways. I totally agree that there is always room for improvement in anything.
And I do live very close to the area and hunt and fish in many areas affected by these projects so yes I am effected by what is happening much more so than most on this board....

Thanks for clarifying about your post. I appeciate your opinion here. I don't want to pull apart your post either. I've heard two viewpoints now. I'll decide for myself which one is full of it. As I learn more I will certainly post about those experiences.

You know guys you would really be surprised at what actually goes on behind closed doors at these large companies.. Let me be the first to tell you we don't sit in rooms all day trying to figure out how to screw the people and the environment,, and I say we because I do sit in on and am involved in drilling programs and project planning on projects for one of our countries largest producers...
When a company is deciding whether to drill in an area or not the first things that are laid on the table are, of course first of all are there reasonable reserves to recover second what are the environmental concerns and what impact are we going to leave on the area and the people and what can be done to eliminate these concerns and last after addressing all these issues is it viable money wise.
We are all users of this land and take pride in our ability to leave the smallest footprint possible, but unfortunately we do leave a footprint.. It can't be helped.. The next time you look and or view an oil company as the demons of the land just remember they are only supplying a service that we are asking for.. Look out in the driveway at the 2 or 3 cars parked there, look in you're shop at the quads, boats, generators, lawnmowers, powersaws ect ect.. Think about all the plastics in you world that you just must have.. Did you know that that is what the majority of Albertas oil is used for.. Maybe we are the demons and I mean all of us...
There are allot of issues in the article that are just not true and or are written in a way that severely mislead the reader and that is why I say to get the facts straight before making a decision...
Are they making a foot print in the north ?? absolutely !!! are they going about it with their nose in the air and taking the money and running ?? absolutely not !!! Most and I would go as far as saying all those companies are signed to strict environment policies.. Suncor and Syncrude are the old boys in that town they have done some remarkable work in returning the land back as "best they can" to its original state.. Will it ever be the same ?? no never but it will be put back to a point were it is a sustainable environment.. You have to understand that it takes time to recover this land.. It has to be left open and raw for a number of years so it can be monitored for toxins and only after numerous years of natural cleansing can it start to be put back into a state of reclamation.. Make no mistake these companies would love nothing better to just go and fill back in the holes and seed er all to grass so they can get it over with but it has to be done rite,, they have learned that the hard way over the years...
Did you know that most of the tailing ponds mentioned in the article are miles and miles away from the river,, and they are tested and re tested to make sure no seepage is taking place.. There are no creeks and rivers running through these ponds down to creeks and onto the river,, it just doesnt happen that way... The smell of hydrocarbons in the town of Fort Mac mentioned in the article have nothing to do with the mines the mines are miles away from town, miles away maybe with the rite wind you would get a smell.. For the most part the smell is from the oil seeping out of the river banks, which you have to blame mother nature for that one... Most of the projects in question are miles away from the river..
Again we absolutely must always ask questions and strive to take care of our resources but please lets use facts,, like I said before not fear mongering and lies...
The Marie project mentioned in an article is an interesting one and I am going to look into what type of seismic is used to look under a lake.. But I will say, I just about garuentee it is a proven non destructive method,, come on do you think any company would go in there and just say the hell with em who cares if we kill the fish,, it just doesnt happen that way.. I will phone the office and get data on the method used I would of done it today but by the time I read the article I was out of the office and head office in Calgary was closed so I couldn't get the proper info... Now as far as the extraction of oil from under the lake.. As said in the Marie Lake post the oil is 400m bellow the lake,, trust me they are not going to strip mine it they will use the SAGD process and the plant I'm sure will be placed in a manner which will not impact the look and or the lake it self.. Much unlike the houses and cabins in the area.. The people in the area are just in asking questions absolutely,, they must.. But maybe if they were so concerned with the lake they wouldn't of put their cabins on it in the first place,, so they could flush their toilets in it and change oil in their engines on its bank and whatever else goes along with housing developments...

Sorry for the long rant but I hope I opened some minds which will cause some to look in the right places and get the facts before just pointing the finger at the money,,, Remember WE ARE ALL THE MONEY...

I'm with walleyes on this one...at least I think I am. I can't possibly be expected to read posts of such unwielding length...I may have A.D.D. But that article did have a definate environmentalist zealot slant to it. I think some of the facts were fiction, as well. I've read several articles that have referenced how all of the coal burning plants in Ontario produces more pollutants, including CO2, that the tar sands in Alberta despite the differing claim in this article. However, I'm also extremely paranoid and have no idea what to believe anymore

Thank you Walleyes, very well written and informative. You have helped to open my eyes even wider. I feel that it is sad how so often 'the truth' is less important than the advancement of causes. Not to say that oil and gas development is having a positive environmental effect on our province, but it is good to hear from their side also. Balance helps everyone to decide what is the truth.

Walleys, when you get that info regarding Marie Lake, could you post it for us?

Thanks for the post back walleyes. I do appreciate hearing the other side.

There are some things we agree on and some I just can't buy from you. If you critisize the article for blind rambling, from my perspective of a "newbie" to this situation, I kind of see the same from you. It sounds to me like you have practically convinced yourself that this is okay - i.e. somehow we will leave a little a footprint as possible. That I just can't buy. I will continue to learn more about this from both sides and I will continue to do what I can to fight it because I truly believe that these projects will leave more of a footprint than anyone knows.

Walleyes,

Boyd Petrosearch has been hired to perform Air Gun 3D Seismic Testing on Marie Lake. The testing has been planned for this spring. Massive public out cry has at the very least delayed the approval of the permitting of the Seismic Testing.

Air Gun 3D Seismic testing involves firing hundreds of thousands of 200 plus decibel sound waves from Airgun Boats from the lakes surface to the lake bottom to confirm if 2 billion barrels of oil sand exist 0.5km under the lake. I requirement by the government prior to any and all oil companies for moving to the next step in planning or permitting. These must undoubtably prove the oil exisits.

At an open house I attended, a question was asked if this testing could kill fish. The answer from a “SRD” representative said “most likely” if the fish was within a meter or so of the air gun device. Damage to the fish’s hearing would obviously be affected and possibly damage to the internal organs as well. The testing firm plan is to fire off a small “pop” a few seconds before each main 200 plus decibel sounds wave is fired. This is done to supposedly scare of any fish in the immediate area. However they recommend that no swimming activities should take place within 500 meters. I’m uncertain to how quickly a fish can swim in a few seconds. I doubt very much its 500 meters. :lol

Interesting enough an article stated that the US Navy Divers must maintain a 2km distance from this testing which has been done on our oceans.

It's a relief for me that this post is so informative and well-rounded in its banter. Since I joined this site I've seen a lot more back and forth about whether people photoshop their fishing pics and insults between members than stuff of substance that matters to us all.

We all depend on energy to get things done and, as mentioned previously, oil provides us with plastics and fuels for a lot of things besides vehicles. Living in Slave Lake, our economy is driven by resource sectors that depend on forestry and oil for people to earn a living. But we also depend on our lake and watershed to survive.

A sad local example for me is still the much maligned Swan Hills waste treatment plant. While providing jobs and economic spinoff, it is at the highest point of a huge watershed that spins off to a large area. People have come to believe it's an acceptable tradeoff to have their fish and wild game limits reduced in exchange for other societal benfits.

An off topic rebuttal? Sorry. Just trying to point out how there's a tradeoff for anything we do in life. Want to go to a strip club? Pay for it when you get home. Staying up all night getting drunk, paying the next day.

I guess my two cents comes from a recent series of documentaries on CBC called 'Oil:A world over a barrel' or something like that. The thing I took away from it all was not the destruction, bad planning, or economic results but the fact that it all has the same cause. The same reason. Consumers drive this industry. Much like the illicit drug industry would collapse with no demand, the oil industry will not slow until it runs out or the demand drops. With emerging economic powerhouses in India and China, the demand will not stop anytime soon.

I'm glad that there are people like the Outraged Outdoorsman to keep these issues at the surface. Even if the conversation were to be ignorant, misinformed, or completely wrong it still leads to discussion and keeps the issues on the radar. Some of the countries that Big Oil has emptied already aren't so lucky - the resource is gone, the economy is gone, and the environment and future generations are left paying for it. If posts like this can keep shaping our mutual future for the better we stand better chances of maintaining the balance between prosperity and health.

Sorry for being longwinded, just trying to add to the discussion.

In discussing these issues, the word "balance" is usually trucked out by both sides, like it actually represents something real. It becomes propaganda. The best example that comes to mind is the illustration of a grizzly and human family on opposite sides of a balance scale that was made into a bumper sticker during the Cheviot mine controversy. The bumper sticker was used by mine supporters to tell us that people mattered just as much as bears. Although, they didn't realize it, whoever made that bumper sticker was really close the the real truth of the matter - what we want to call "balance" is really "tradeoff". Human activities have consequences for wildlife and wild places, some more negative, severe and enduring than others. If we want oil, then there is a cost, and it's waay more honest to call it a cost and put it up against the benefit of having the oil, cuz treating it as a tradeoff, means we can start dealing. Calling it a balance never gets us anything other than incremental loss.

Oil Sands are a case-in-point. The concept of mining the sands and then reclaming the land is what we all want to buy into. That way, we can have our cake and eat it too, right? In order to accept that, we have to convince ourselves that the complex boreal ecosystem can be recreated in time. In truth, we have no idea how that will turn out. It's like making a deal with someone who promises to pay you "something...maybe...later". Who would make that deal??

Wouldn't it be better to call the loss of the Muskeg and Steepbank watersheds a cost, stare it in the face and make a decision to accept that cost or not? Then, if we accept that cost, we can talk about what we are owed in return for paying that price. Maybe we should get back more than some oil, which will benefit only those that happen to be alive now to use it? Maybe we will decide that we and our kids are owed an equal hunk of land for preservation. The tradeoff for losing the Oil Sands area becomes the gaining of a preserved area where there is no industrial activity. I could accept that. It sucks to lost a couple of watersheds, but the absolute preservation of a couple of others is equitable.

The balance approach is irrational, dishonest and disastrous, leading us to accept degradation or loss bit by bit. The tradeoff approach makes us accountable for our actions.

Maybe it's time to stop living the fairy tale.

I read that article in the magazine a few weeks ago. It does give a different view of the issues in the area but there is definetly some misinformation/inflation of statistics. Does make you think though.

Many improvements have been made in the process and reclamation of these mega projects. You have to look at the big picture on the land base though. The mines seem large until you fly over in a chopper and see how much land there is.

Must also remember we're all guilty of causing this damage. Think what kind of vehicle you drive? How many nice roads and infrastructure do we enjoy in Alberta? We can tell the oil companies to stop but doesn't mean much when most guys are driving a half ton and enjoying the toys they bought with Ralphs bucks. Remember where Alberta's money comes from.

I'm not supporting the damage but i try not to be a complete hypocrit as well. Many of you may not consume much oil or use our roads too much but i would be a complete hypocrit if i called for no more developement myself. I have a quarter ton and drive tens of thousands of kilometers a year for work and recreation. I use more than my fair share of oil. Something to think about. A good article for broadning a guys horizons.

I see Cheviot mentioned, i won't get started on that one. A lot of false data and misconceptions were used trying to stall the project. Theres still grizzlies in the area if anyones wondering . Very similar tactics were used to cancel Alberta's grizzly hunt.

If it wasnt for FortMac boom and the oil/gas in AB we have, more of you would be working @ McDonalds.

99% of the time i dont agree with the treehuggers, but its not rite to ruin beautiful Marie lake!

To Those of us who spent our entire life's in FtMcMurray have seen the destruction done,for anyone to say the article was fear mongering environmentalist's is hiding thier head's in the sand!