Alberta rejects federal nature strategy, redefines protected land

Alberta's surround government minister has expanded the province's definition of " saved lands" in a call to turn away Ottawa's nature strategy. 

This comes after Canada, along with 195 other countries, announced plans to protect 30 per cent of its land by 2030, an objective known as 30x30. 

But Grant Hunter, Alberta’s minister of environment and protected areas, said in a press release that the province already protects 60 per cent of its land based on its own definition.

“Federal reporting measures do not capture the full picture, focusing on narrow definitions of protected land,” he said.

“Alberta takes a different approach. Our province includes all publicly owned and regulated lands, including those protected from development.”

To reach the 30x30 goal, Canada intends to protect an additional 1.6 million square kilometres of land over the next four years, through $3.8 billion in federal investments alongside private sector funding.

Alberta rejects Ottawa's one-size-fits-all approach to conservation and expects recognition and provincial jurisdiction of all national conservation targets, Hunter said.

Alberta’s claim to have already achieved the 30x30 commitment is “concerning” and “disingenuous,” said Kecia Kerr, the executive director of Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society (CPAWS) Northern Alberta.

“They can have issues with a certain target, but Canada has committed to this goal,” she said. 

Under the federal definition, protected areas are limited to those prioritizing conservation including national and provincial parks, wildlife areas and Indigenous protected and controlled areas.

However, Hunter’s statement said protected lands in Alberta now include Crown land owned by the province used for commercial forestry, oil and gas exploration and mining.

Despite this, CPAWS reports that 15 per cent of Alberta’s land is formally classified as protected, much lower than the 60 per cent claimed by Hunter earlier this week. 

Cliff Wallis, a professional biologist registered in Alberta, said defining public land as protected does not reflect what is happening on the ground.

“If you're just going to say ‘it's protected,’ but you allow new helium development, oil and gas development, or forestry, it's a meaningless term,” said Wallis. 

Alberta’s conservation history can be described as a "roller coaster," said Wallis. He recalls the era of former Alberta Premier Peter Lougheed, who was elected in 1971 on a platform that included protecting areas like Kananaskis Country. 

He said that at the time, the door between scientists and the government was open.

Wallis describes the relationship today as a "devolution into non-leadership" and "outright hostility" toward traditional conservation. He pointed to the grasslands and parklands — some of the most endangered ecosystems in Canada — where less than 2 per cent of the land is protected by Alberta’s own reporting standards in 2024.

While politicians debate definitions, the real barometer for conservation success lies in the species and ecosystems, said Justina Ray, president and senior scientist of Wildlife Conservation Society Canada.

“There are alarm bells for grassland birds that are declining, for amphibians and reptiles... And caribou are hanging on,” said Ray, noting that caribou populations have suffered from the cumulative effect of seismic lines that cause deforestation.

“While there is plenty of great nature in Alberta, there are still signs of major pressures and that biodiversity itself is suffering.”

Kerr said she’s glad to see the federal government commit $3.8 billion over the course of the next four years to conservation, but noted it’s a funding cut.

Those cuts, supplemented by funds from philanthropic organizations and private industry, may pose conflicts of interests, Kerr said.

“If it's private companies that are investing in nature there's gonna have to be some sort of economic return for them in order for them to make it make sense to their stakeholders.”

Ray said the federal announcement mentioned nature's importance for security, sovereignty, human well-being and the economy. She said that makes it hard to understand why the objectives of strategy would be “offensive to any jurisdiction.”

“We all need nature in some form or another,” Ray said. “So trying to figure out how to safeguard it while we're in the midst of our other aspirations would be a good thing.”

Reporter

---

---