A lack of money may shelve or scale down a study into the possible
effects of the oil and gas industry on cattle and wildlife.
Scientists must find at least $5 million by mid-March to finish
collecting scientific information from thousands of cattle and wild
animals across the Prairies.
“This is a terribly important study,” said Tee Guidotti, co-chair of
the scientific advisory panel.
“It’s a landmark study. It’s hard to imagine something that is more
Read Also
Canola oil transloading facility opens
DP World just opened its new canola oil transload facility at the Port of Vancouver. It can ship one million tonnes of the commodity per year.
fundamental to Alberta’s health and well-being.”
For more than 25 years, farmers and ranchers have said flaring of
unwanted natural gas releases toxic chemicals that harm livestock and
humans. The oil and gas industry has maintained there is no scientific
proof that flaring causes harm.
The $19 million Western Canada Study on Animal and Human Effects was
supposed to find some answers.
Michael O’Connell, study manager for the project, said the Alberta
government provided $11 million to start the study last year and the
British Columbian government contributed $20,000. Since then, the
Alberta Beef Producers has given $150,000 and the Canadian Association
of Petroleum Producers has pledged $1 million.
It still leaves a $6.9 million shortfall. About $5 million is needed by
March to complete the data collection and to put the data into
computers.
Directors of the not-for-profit Western Interprovincial Scientific
Studies Association have made presentations to large oil and gas
companies and the other prairie provincial governments to help raise
the rest of the money.
“Given the response of industry to date, we are optimistic that we will
secure the funding required to bring the study to fruition,” O’Connell
said.
Guidotti, a former University of Alberta scientist and now a professor
at George Washington University in Washington, D.C., said data
collection cannot be halted if the study is to maintain its integrity.
In the cattle portion of the study, 55 veterinary clinics have been
hired to collect information on 206 herds from northeastern B.C.,
Alberta and Saskatchewan. Information on nutrition, herd management and
calving data will be collected from 33,000 head.
The European starling will also be studied to determine whether
exposure to emissions from oil and gas field facilities adversely
affect wild birds’ reproduction and immune systems.
A 10-member scientific advisory panel reviewed how the study was
designed to ensure it meets scientific approval.
Guidotti said a study of this scope has never been undertaken before.
Veterinarians began collecting information last April and will continue
doing so until this December, provided funding is found. The data will
be analyzed in 2003, a draft report will be released in 2004 and a
scientific panel of peers will then review the information.
“The peer review is critical for the scientific credibility for this
study,” O’Connell said.
“That’s a prerequisite for any credible, scientific study.”
Guidotti said he hopes the study will provide answers for both sides of
the debate.
“First of all, there’s a major source of contention between the cattle
industry, which represents the kind of rural bedrock values that are
the foundation of the Alberta heritage and the other provinces on the
Prairies. Then there’s the foundation of our economic prosperity, which
is the oil and gas industry,” he said.
“This is an opportunity to settle the matter.”
If the association is unable to find enough money, Guidotti said the
study could be scaled back, but it can’t be scrapped.
“The study can’t pause, it’s just impossible,” he said.
“A pause in the study means a gap in data collection that will destroy
the integrity of the data. The study has to carry forward.”
He said scientists must look hard at what data can be eliminated from
the study and still maintain its credibility.
“The most important thing is to maintain the integrity and the
accuracy.”
Originally there was to be a human health study that ran parallel to
the herd health study. Alberta Health decided to wait and see what the
animal health study showed before proceeding with the human health
study.
