KANANASKIS COUNTRY – A bridge over the Highwood River in a largely pristine area of ​​Kananaskis is slated for demolition, but what that means for a controversial logging plan that requires access via the waterway is still unclear.

West Fraser Timber, which plans to log 2,000 football fields in the Upper Highwood forest, confirmed it has begun dismantling the bridge. The bridge was originally built by Spray Lake Sawmills before being purchased by the British Columbia lumber giant in 2023.

This is welcome news for recreationists and conservationists, including the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society (CPAWS), but it also brings with it a touch of uncertainty.

“We just got this news recently and I’m really trying to understand what the company is trying to do with this,” said Josh Killeen, conservation scientist and program manager at CPAWS in southern Alberta.

“Yes, they are removing the bridge, but it is unclear if they plan to build another bridge and what that would look like, and whether they want to continue harvesting. I don’t know the answer to that at the moment.”

In a statement, Joyce Wagenaar, West Fraser’s communications director, said the company has begun remediation of the bridge site, including demolition, with a new structure to be built in its place by summer 2025.

The Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) launched an investigation into the bridge in the summer of 2023 because the Highwood River is considered an important habitat for threatened native trout species such as the bull trout and the logging company had failed to obtain a permit to build the bridge.

Ministry spokesman Rodney Drover said investigations of this kind could be “complex and extensive and take some time”.

“We can confirm that West Fraser is currently in the process of removing the bridge in consultation with the DFO,” he said in an email, noting that the DFO could not provide further details at this time.

The investigation and the earlier purchase of Spray Lakes temporarily halted the clear-cutting plan, originally scheduled for winter 2023/24. West Fraser later announced it would extend the pause to speak with stakeholders.

Wagenaar said the company is still working with stakeholders to refine the harvest plan.

“Further improvements will ensure environmental protection and the preservation of many forest management values, such as fish habitat, water quality and recreation,” she said. “We are continuing our work on site assessment of streams to establish appropriate buffers and crossing structures to protect water values, confirm existing trails and ensure public use of the area.”

West Fraser’s current operating plan calls for clear-cutting in the Upper Highwood during the winter of 2024-25, but Waagenar told the outlook This will be paused to publicly present the revised harvest plan at an open day in spring 2025 prior to the planned harvest in fall 2025.

The timing of the bridge demolition will be chosen taking into account government policy to minimise impacts on fish, she added – a concern shared by CPAWS.

Bull trout usually spawn in the fall, from late August to early October.

“We are a little concerned about the process of removing the bridge at this time,” Killeen said. “This is an important time for the trout that use the Highwood River.”

Environmental field research

Killeen is part of a project team currently conducting field research using public funds to document the impacts of logging on forest hydrology, fish distribution and habitat use, and to monitor erosion and sedimentation along Loomis Creek and the Highwood River.

The $55,000 effort to protect the region because of its importance to native trout species and the integrity of headwaters is led by CPAWS and supported by experts in geoscience, fish biology and aquatic ecology.

Expert analysis as part of an Environmental DNA study commissioned by CPAWS in winter 2023-24 and funded by the Bow River Trout Foundation has already demonstrated that the watershed provides critical habitat for fish listed under the Species at Risk Act, including bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout.

A subsequent watershed assessment additionally indicated that West Fraser’s 1,200-hectare logging plan could not be implemented without impacting critical fish habitat through sediment deposition associated with logging.

Experts concluded that forest roads, water crossings and inadequate tree cover due to clear-cutting alongside rivers, as well as higher and lower peak flows associated with flooding and drought, pose a “chronic” threat in the form of increased sediment and the likelihood of rising river temperatures.

Of particular concern to conservationists is the plan to clear a significant portion of the waterways without riparian protection. Under West Fraser’s current plan, more than 25 percent of the waterways will be left unprotected in 22 of the region’s 36 sub-watersheds.

This latest eco-hydrological assessment is based on a comprehensive, field-based approach that builds on previous findings and provides an “indisputable” argument against deforestation in the area.

“That’s why we really wanted to go into more detail and actually get out there and document some of these potential risks,” Killeen said.

“With our work, we’re trying to do this in a really comprehensive way and get really high-quality details about forest hydrology – the way the forest and water system interact, about fish distribution and habitat use, and about erosion and sedimentation risks,” he added.

“Our goal is to really provide a comprehensive picture of the current state of this catchment, its current condition and the potential risks to that condition if the logging plan is actually implemented.”

Data collection – conducted from July until snowfall – includes spawning surveys, particularly for trout, further environmental DNA surveys in previously unanalyzed tributaries of Loomis Creek, snorkeling surveys to look for areas with young-of-the-year individuals that indicate the breeding population, and a habitat quality survey.

In addition, the water quality will be examined more closely and where erosion is occurring and where risks exist will be determined.

“We know that parts of the watershed already have some erosion, possibly from previous logging use, which probably occurred in the 1960s,” Killeen said.

“We also have a good idea of ​​where the risks are based on the geology… so we map those and understand them in relation to the planned harvest areas.”

The work of forest hydrology primarily involves monitoring temperatures, including those of streams. Native trout species require cold, clean water temperatures to survive.

Who should take responsibility?

In early June, CPAWS announced it was raising funds for further studies of the Upper Highwood. By the end of the month, it had exceeded its goal of $55,000 to fund the time, labor and costs of hiring a consultant.

The request was urgent as the annual road closure to Upper Highwood will reopen on 15 June and the field season is short before the planned resumption of timber harvesting operations.

“Given the timing of the original logging plan, we felt we needed to get this done this summer. West Fraser had planned to harvest last winter and fortunately that did not happen,” said Katie Morrison, CPAWS executive director for southern Alberta.

“So it was really important to us to do this right away, and we didn’t have the luxury of time to apply for grants or find long-term funding. But we also knew that this is a place and a campaign that people are really committed to, so we were able to use crowdfunding to gather that data before any plans go into action.”

Morrison said she was grateful that the public and nonprofit organizations such as the Bow River Trout Foundation had provided strong support for the research effort.

But it also raises the question of who should be responsible for understanding the environmental impacts of clearcutting: the public, the government or the logging companies?

Morrison argues that responsibility for this should lie with governments and forestry companies.

“This is the kind of work that should be done on a regular basis to understand the risks to a watershed,” she said.

“This kind of rigorous computer and field work that is taking place in the Highwood should really be done across the board before forest plans are made and approved so that we really manage our forestry to avoid these high-risk areas.”

Killeen noted that the watershed risk assessment requirements are “very fundamental” for companies operating in Alberta, whether in forestry or other sectors.

In Alberta, source water protection is enshrined in several laws and regulations, but challenges remain. To be effective, source water protection must occur at the watershed level.

A July report by the Auditor General identified deficiencies in Alberta’s water protection system, with protection goals not being met in most watersheds and the agency lacking risk assessment processes.

“That means we simply do not have a clear idea of ​​the risks and also the consequences of such operations,” said Killeen.

“That means we and the public need to fund and do that work and be a kind of whistleblower when there are problems, rather than having a strong government regulator requiring more detailed watershed surveys like we are doing and have done in the past and requiring companies to pay for that. That is absolutely within their power and should be required for any region like this where we know that species and really important values ​​related to water supplies are at risk.”

---

The local journalism initiative is funded by the Government of Canada and covers the Îyârhe (Stoney) Nakoda First Nation and Kananaskis Country.