Alberta
Thank the beetle and deadwood ‘fuel’ that should have been cleared

By Josh Andrus
Originally posted in the Western Standard
Parks Canada officials admit they failed to conduct controlled burns of dead pine trees, which now pose a significant fire risk.
While Ottawa fixates on climate change rhetoric, their neglect of forest fire prevention has left Alberta’s landscapes vulnerable to devastation.
Last week, a shining beacon of the beauty of our province was partially destroyed as a wildfire burned through the picturesque town of Jasper. Our thoughts and prayers go out to the victims.
Thankfully there has been no reported loss of life. But many people’s livelihoods have been wiped out. The question is how did this happen, and what could have been done to prevent it?
Smokey Bear’s famous saying was: “Only you can prevent forest fires.” And, in this case, proactive measures certainly could have made a difference.
Unfortunately, the entire federal government seems to have forgotten Smokey’s key point. Fire prevention on national park land is federal jurisdiction.
In 2022, Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault was informed that Parks Canada managers had not taken adequate precautions to protect the Town of Jasper from wildfires, according to documents obtained by Blacklock’s Reporter. At that time, Parks Canada officials admitted they had failed to conduct controlled burns of dead pine trees, which posed a significant fire risk.
“A mountain pine beetle infestation has brought significant changes to forests in Alberta, including Jasper National Park, with consequences for wildfire risk,” Guilbeault was informed.
Almost half of Jasper’s Whitebark Pine forest, 44%, was infected by beetles. However, few steps were taken to reduce the risk to the Town of Jasper with controlled burns of the surrounding forest, records show.
“Fire has not yet been applied for Whitebark Pine restoration,” stated a 2022 implementation report. “Mechanical thinning has been completed in 1.6 hectares, which is a small area relative to the amount of Whitebark Pine habitat.”
No reason was given for failing to take precautions. Since the fire, Guilbeault has made no public mention of the management reports.
Even though federal officials, including his department, knew the raging pine beetle was a serious hazard, Guilbeault blamed climate change: “As we are seeing in Canada and all around the world, we are seeing more and more aggressive forest fires,” he said on a media call on Monday.
Landon Shepherd, Incident Commander for Parks Canada, also attributed the intensity of the blazes to climate change: “This isn’t meant to be a discussion about climate change, but anyone who’s involved in fire management can tell you that things have become more difficult, especially in the last five years, to manage impacts.”
The 2022 warnings were not the first time concerns about a lack of fire prevention in national parks have been raised.
In 2018, CBC reported concerns from experts. Emile Begin and Ken Hodges, foresters for 40 years who had been studying Jasper National Park, found multiple issues with the forest that make it susceptible to a fire.
“You have fire suppression that has occurred for many years — therefore, you get a lot of dead fuel that would have been consumed by a natural process,” Hodges said. “The mountain pine beetle adds even more fuel to the situation.”
“You’ve got a major catastrophe on your hands if you get a match thrown into that.”
When pressed about the concerns, Alan Fehr, a superintendent for Jasper National Park, said: “We’re quite comfortable with where we are with our own emergency planning and evacuation planning.”
Hodges disagreed: “The potential that’s out there is actually scary. Hopefully, we’re wrong.”
Despite the repeated warnings of potential devastation due to forest management practices, Ottawa continues to point to climate change as the cause of the fires.
The Alberta government has been preparing, and increased its firefighting budget by more than 50% to $155.4 million this year. Alberta’s firefighting budget is now the highest it has ever been (despite misinformation about cuts.)
However, without proper fire prevention on national park land, blazes can become out of control quickly — as the warnings indicated.
Smokey Bear would be horrified. Clearly, Ottawa needs to spend less time interfering in provincial jurisdiction and more time focusing on things that actually are federal jurisdiction, like fire prevention in national parks.
Their inability to see the forest through the trees and take legitimate action to protect our national parks from the fury of an out-of-control wildfire demonstrates a degree of ineptitude that is, quite frankly, shocking.
Ottawa needs to stay in its lane and focus on its own jurisdiction, and they need to stop blaming climate change for their own ineptitude.
Alberta
Alberta taxpayers should know how much their municipal governments spend

From the Fraser Institute
By Tegan Hill and Austin Thompson
Next week, voters across Alberta will go to the polls to elect their local governments. Of course, while the issues vary depending on the city, town or district, all municipal governments spend taxpayer money.
And according to a recent study, Grande Prairie County and Red Deer County were among Alberta’s highest-spending municipalities (on a per-person basis) in 2023 (the latest year of comparable data). Kara Westerlund, president of the Rural Municipalities of Alberta, said that’s no surprise—arguing that it’s expensive to serve a small number of residents spread over large areas.
That challenge is real. In rural areas, fewer people share the cost of roads, parks and emergency services. But high spending isn’t inevitable. Some rural municipalities managed to spend far less, demonstrating that local choices about what services to provide, and how to deliver them, matter.
Consider the contrast in spending levels among rural counties. In 2023, Grande Prairie County and Red Deer County spent $5,413 and $4,619 per person, respectively. Foothills County, by comparison, spent just $2,570 per person. All three counties have relatively low population densities (fewer than seven residents per square kilometre) yet their per-person spending varies widely. (In case you’re wondering, Calgary spent $3,144 and Edmonton spent $3,241.)
Some of that variation reflects differences in the cost of similar services. For example, all three counties provide fire protection but in 2023 this service cost $56.95 per person in Grande Prairie County, $38.51 in Red Deer County and $10.32 in Foothills County. Other spending differences reflect not just how much is spent, but whether a service is offered at all. For instance, in 2023 Grande Prairie County recorded $46,283 in daycare spending, while Red Deer County and Foothills County had none.
Put simply, population density alone simply doesn’t explain why some municipalities spend more than others. Much depends on the choices municipal governments make and how efficiently they deliver services.
Westerlund also dismissed comparisons showing that some counties spend more per person than nearby towns and cities, calling them “apples to oranges.” It’s true that rural municipalities and cities differ—but that doesn’t make comparisons meaningless. After all, whether apples are a good deal depends on the price of other fruit, and a savvy shopper might switch to oranges if they offer better value. In the same way, comparing municipal spending—across all types of communities—helps Albertans judge whether they get good value for their tax dollars.
Every municipality offers a different mix of services and those choices come with different price tags. Consider three nearby municipalities: in 2023, Rockyview County spent $3,419 per person, Calgary spent $3,144 and Airdrie spent $2,187. These differences reflect real trade-offs in the scope, quality and cost of local services. Albertans should decide for themselves which mix of local services best suits their needs—but they can’t do that without clear data on what those services actually cost.
A big municipal tax bill isn’t an inevitable consequence of rural living. How much gets spent in each Alberta municipality depends greatly on the choices made by the mayors, reeves and councillors Albertans will elect next week. And for Albertans to determine whether or not they get good value for their local tax dollars, they must know how much their municipality is spending.
Alberta
Premier Smith addresses the most important issue facing Alberta teachers: Classroom Complexity

Premier Danielle Smith is posting this response to a media question about Classroom Complexity.
While Albertans are hearing a lot about capping class sizes, Premier Smith says it might be a much better idea to talk about capping “complexity”.
The challenges teachers face in today’s classrooms are recognized, and work continues toward practical solutions that address their concerns.
Achieving a fair and reasonable agreement that best supports students remains a top priority. pic.twitter.com/o4UCt7sDoU
— Danielle Smith (@ABDanielleSmith) October 16, 2025
-
National1 day ago
Democracy Watch Renews Push for Independent Prosecutor in SNC-Lavalin Case
-
Alberta2 days ago
Enbridge CEO says ‘there’s a good reason’ for Alberta to champion new oil pipeline
-
Censorship Industrial Complex2 days ago
Canada’s privacy commissioner says he was not consulted on bill to ban dissidents from internet
-
Alberta1 day ago
Click here to help choose Alberta’s new licence plate design
-
International20 hours ago
Hamas will disarm or die
-
illegal immigration20 hours ago
Los Angeles declares a state of emergency over ICE deportations
-
Business2 days ago
Former Trump Advisor Says US Must Stop UN ‘Net Zero’ Climate Tax On American Ships
-
International1 day ago
Daughter convinces healthy father to die in double assisted suicide with mother