A condition of gaining approval for proposed tar sands development projects is the stipulation that land be ‘reclaimed’ after it has been in most cases, strip mined. However, ‘reclamation’ is calculated in terms of ‘equivalent values’, which in a recent case has meant that 40% of disturbed land must be returned the ‘commercial forest capabilities’, effectively creating a natural environment of harvestable reconstructed commercial forest and artificial lakes. Oil companies claim that they will return the land to its original state by ‘burying’ tailings under existing freshwater lakes and wetlands, using an artificial series of creeks and ponds flowing to “end-pit lakes” which are supposed to filter toxic chemicals and allow them to settle to sediment. However, no studies exist to show that this can be done successfully.
Currently, of the 420 km² of land that has been disturbed, 65 km² is considered to be in reclamation. The first official certificate of reclamation was awarded to Syncrude in March of 2008 for its Gateway Hill project located 35 kilometers north of Fort McMurray. Originally, the 1.04 km² area was wetland — including a system of fens, shallow ponds, muskeg and marshes. These natural land features purify water, prevent soil erosion and serve as flood control, in addition to providing a natural habitat for wetland wildlife. After 40 years of ‘reclamation’, the Gateway Hill site is now an upland landscape with young forest growth and hiking and biking trails, and some wetland areas. A study conducted by Simon Frasier University concluded that “wetlands formed from oil sands effluent will not support viable amphibian populations”. With this site as the only example of ’successful’ reclamation, oil companies claims that they will return the land used in tar sands operations to its original state seem entirely implausible.