Water is already at risk in Alberta due to poor management - Water is Life

Water in Alberta is already under severe stress. Many of the province’s major watersheds are fully allocated, groundwater systems are poorly understood, wetlands continue to be lost, and climate change is intensifying drought cycles. In this context, the draft Co‑operation Agreement Between Alberta and Canada poses significant risks to water security by inviting the federal government to rely on Alberta’s environmental assessment (EA) and regulatory processes for projects primarily under provincial jurisdiction (Clause 1(1)) and to avoid “duplicative decision‑making” by deferring to Alberta where Alberta asserts it can address federal effects (Clause 3(1)).

This approach is incompatible with the reality of water management in Alberta.

Alberta’s Water‑Management System Is Not Equipped to Protect Federal Interests

Alberta’s EA and regulatory processes evaluate water impacts on a project‑by‑project basis. They do not assess cumulative withdrawals across a basin, integrate climate projections, protect ecological flows, or evaluate downstream interprovincial impacts. Water licensing remains governed by “first in time, first in right,” a system that prioritizes senior licence holders over ecological needs and Indigenous rights. Monitoring and enforcement gaps further undermine water protection, with inconsistent data collection and limited transparency.

These weaknesses are not incidental, they are structural. A system that has not protected water to date cannot be the foundation for federal reliance going forward.

The Draft Agreement Would Entrench These Weaknesses

• Clause 1(1) invites Canada to rely on Alberta’s processes to address federal water‑related effects, despite Alberta’s track record of over‑allocation, weak cumulative‑effects management, and limited protection for fish habitat, migratory birds, and interprovincial waters.
• Clause 3(1) frames federal oversight as duplication, when in fact federal assessment is the only process that consistently evaluates cumulative watershed impacts, climate‑related water risks, and Indigenous rights.
• Clause 6(1) states that federal conditions will defer to provincial conditions where provincial tools exist—even when those tools are weaker, unenforced, or incomplete.
• Clause 7(1) proposes that Canada “recognize Alberta as best placed to consult with Indigenous Peoples,” despite Canada’s constitutional obligations under s.91(24) and Alberta’s failure to protect Indigenous water rights, water security or uphold UNDRIP‑aligned standards.

Together, these clauses would reduce federal oversight at the very moment Alberta’s water systems require stronger protection.

Recommendations

To safeguard water security, the agreement must be amended to:

• Remove automatic deference clauses (1(1), 3(1), 6(1), 7(1)).
• Require a water‑management equivalency analysis before federal reliance.
• Mandate federal assessment in water‑stressed or over‑allocated basins.
• Ensure Canada retains responsibility for consultation where water impacts affect Indigenous rights and Indigenous water security.
• Establish minimum standards for water monitoring, transparency, and ecological‑flow protection.

Conclusion

Alberta’s water systems are already at their limits. The draft Co‑operation Agreement would weaken federal oversight and entrench a provincial system that has not protected water, has not managed cumulative effects, and has not upheld Indigenous water rights. Water requires stronger governance, not less. Canada must revise the agreement to ensure that water protection remains a federal priority and that federal responsibilities are not delegated to a system that cannot meet them. Better yet, revise the agreement to ensure First Nations and Métis play a role in water management and guardianship.