Pierre River Mine Project

TERRESTRIAL AENV SIRS 44 – 78
Section 13.1
http://www.cemaonline.ca/component/option,com_docman/task,doc_do
wnload/gid,1484/
Wilson, B., J.B. Stelfox, K. Porter, M. Patriquin, M. Ingen-Housz. 2008a.
Summary of methodology for the development of the terrestrial
ecosystem management framework. 27 pp. Available online:
http://www.cemaonline.ca/component/option,com_docman/task,doc_do
wnload/gid,1486/
Wilson, B., J.B. Stelfox, M. Patriquin. 2008b. SEWG workplan facilitation and
modelling project data inputs and assumptions. 68 pp. Available online:
http://www.cemaonline.ca/component/option,com_docman/task,doc_do
wnload/gid,1487/
Request 65b Discuss which representation most closely approximates what should be
expected and planned for.
Response 65b Due to the great degree of uncertainty contained within the far future scenarios,
and the difficulty of parsing out project-specific contributions to a predevelopment
baseline, the CEMA SEWG approach is not appropriate for use in
an EIA. At the scale of the project, the representation found within the EIA most
closely represents what is likely expected and planned for. However, the far
future planning used in the CEMA SEWG modelling effort does have value as a
long term planning tool for the Province of Alberta.
The CEMA SEWG modelling forecasts changes to habitat for 100 years based on
predicted patterns of forest harvesting and fire, as well as forecasted patterns of
oil sands development and reclamation (Wilson et al. 2008b). Patterns of
development and reclamation were based on ratios of development footprints to
Alberta Energy bitumen production estimates. The rate of footprint development
is dependent on socio-economic factors as well as technological advancements.
Wilson et al. (2008b) acknowledge some of this uncertainty by including an
“Innovative Approaches Scenario”, that uses lower footprint to bitumen
production ratios. However, further uncertainty exists than is recognized by the
range of scenarios, as technological advancements, economic conditions, and
societal tolerances for development are unpredictable. In contrast, the approach
used for the terrestrial assessment of the EIA does not utilize disturbance
scenarios based on high levels of uncertainty. The EIA addresses existing and
planned projects disclosed up to six months before the EIA filing. In addition, the
effects of disturbances on wildlife in the EIA are estimated conservatively by not
including progressive reclamation in the Planned Development Case. Further
development patterns are uncertain, and were not included in the EIA.
For estimating effects to key indicator resources, the CEMA SEWG modelling
effort compared estimated future wildlife habitat and population conditions to
pre-development (Wilson et al 2008a) conditions. In contrast, the EIA compares
habitat and population conditions in each scenario to a Base Case that
13-52 Shell Canada Limited April 2010
CR029