In 1994, Sunpine Forest Products Ltd. sought permits from Alberta government to construct a permanent log hauling road and approvals from the federal government for construction of required bridges associated with the road. A concerned citizens group challenged the Federal Government's subsequent bridge approvals in court, claiming that cumulative effects assessment was not adequately conducted under Canadian Environmental Assessment Act. The original Sunpine court decision agreed with the citizen group that the federal government erred in law by not including related projects and adequately considering associated cumulative effects, sending the approval back to the federal government for reconsideration. Government regulators, industrial foresters, and environmental groups across Canada awaited the appeal to the Sunpine federal court decision. The Sunpine Appeal reversed the original position with much relief from industry and government. The Sunpine case raises important issues about how federal and provincial authorities address environmental impacts, uncertainty in scoping assessments, factors to be considered, and cumulative effect assessments. This paper evaluates the cumulative effects assessment processes followed in the Sunpine case study under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act within an analysis framework of comprehensiveness, fairness, efficiency, and effectiveness. Land use planning models, like the British Columbia land resource management plans and Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act, offer alternative approaches to legislated cumulative effects processes. Sustainability may be better realised with a combination of strategic environmental assessment tools, utilising environmental assessment at the project-level within the context of a regional resource planning process.
Cumulative effects assessment and EIA follow-up: a proposed community-based monitoring program in the Oil Sands Region, northeastern Alberta
