Connect with us

Alberta

Alberta investigates Red Deer County family’s lead-contaminated water well near gravel mine

Published

3 years ago

6 minute read

By Bob Weber

Red Deer County – Alberta Environment is investigating how a family’s water well near a gravel mine became so contaminated by lead it’s no longer drinkable.

The investigation comes as Red Deer County considers expanding mine operations that Jody Young suspects are the source of the lead she and her family may have been drinking for months.

“We have it in our blood,” said Young. “My son’s levels are actually higher than mine.”

Young, who lives just south of Red Deer near the banks of the Red Deer River, has lived within a few hundred metres of the county’s gravel mine for more than a decade.

She grew used to the slight murkiness of her once-clear well water as the mines near her central Alberta home stepped up production. Tests a few years ago showed the water was OK and she preferred the tap to a plastic bottle.

But the water kept getting worse.

“We’ve gone from just seeing it in a bathtub to being able to see it in a glass of water,” she said.

So last summer she asked Alberta Health Services to test her family’s well water. Within days, she got a call.

“They told us to immediately stop drinking our water,” she said. “We weren’t to cook with it. We were advised not even to brush our teeth with it.”

Lead — which can cause anemia, weakness, kidney and brain damage — was above levels fit for human consumption. So was aluminum.

Both metals were subsequently found in blood samples from her family.

“It was deeply concerning to learn of well water contamination in Red Deer County,” said Alberta Environment spokeswoman Carla Jones in an email. “The source of these metals is under investigation.”

On Feb. 7, Young plans to appear at a public hearing hosted by Red Deer County to oppose proposed changes to a county land-use bylaw. The changes would permit gravel mines on land virtually adjacent to her water well.

The proposed expansion site, privately owned, is also on land considered environmentally significant by provincial regulators.

“We are in full compliance with Alberta Environment on our pit,” said Dave Dittrick, Red Deer County’s assistant manager. Private operators would have to follow the same regulations, he said.

“Everything they do will have to be in compliance.”

Dittrick said although the county is co-operating with Alberta Environment, it hasn’t seen the data that prompted Alberta Health’s concern.

“We have not seen any information to substantiate these claims,” he said.

Gravel, or aggregate, mines are needed for everything from paving roads to building houses. Although they’re everywhere in Alberta, data on them is hard to find.

Mines larger than five hectares must be registered and come under provincial regulation. Mines that go below the water table or involve significant water use require a Water Act licence.

“Alberta has a robust regulatory approval process to manage environmental impacts of gravel pits,” said Alberta Environment spokesman Miguel Racin.

Smaller mines — the expansion near Young’s well would be about three hectares — are largely regulated by local land-use bylaws.

But observers say such mines are an increasing concern as Alberta continues to grow.

“It’s a problem in every county,” said Vivian Pharis, an environmentalist who has been involved in previous conflicts over such mines.

“We don’t have any good provincial regulations. The primary decision is made at the municipal level and, as soon as the zoning gets changed, then it seems Alberta Environment’s hands are tied.”

Hydrogeologist Jon Fennell, who has consulted on several mine projects, said gravel mines run the risk of exposing and releasing chemicals formerly held stable.

“If you’re opening (a mine) up and exposing things to oxygen, they can weather and oxidize and get mobilized,” he said. “Any time you disturb the earth, things change.”

While municipalities are in charge of much of the gravel mine permitting process, Fennell points out they are also heavy gravel users.

“They’re very pro-gravel in some parts of the province,” he said.

Red Deer County’s previous attempt to expand its aggregate operations near Young’s home was thrown out in 2022 by a Court of King’s Bench judge over an unfair process.

Enforcement is lax even for mines that do come under provincial rules, Fennell said. Operators may be required to monitor water levels, but not water quality.

“It’s not required,” he said. “If you don’t look, you don’t find.”

Gravel mines are necessary, said Dittrick.

“Aggregate is needed for development and development is ongoing,” he said.

Some sources may be more appropriate than others, said Fennell.

“We have to get (gravel) from somewhere. The question is, from where?”

Young wonders how long her family has been drinking lead-contaminated water. And she wonders why she has to wonder about that at all.

“I’ve had some real moments with this,” she said.

She recalls learning about some of her son’s computer searches.

“I found he was Googling about lead poisoning. He was researching potential impacts to himself.”

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Jan. 17, 2023.

Related Topics:

Follow Author

More from this author
Alberta / 3 years ago

Alberta investigates Red Deer County family’s lead-contaminated water well near gravel mine

Alberta

Diploma Exams Affected: No school Monday as ATA rejects offer of enhanced mediation

Published on October 17, 2025

By

Premier Danielle Smith, Minister of Finance Nate Horner, and Minister of Education Demetrios Nicolaides issued the following statement.

“Yesterday, the Provincial Bargaining and Compensation Office wrote to the Alberta Teachers’ Association (ATA) and formally requested an agreement to enter an enhanced mediation process.

“This process would have ensured that students returned to the classrooms on Monday, and that teachers returned to work.

“Negotiating would have continued with the ATA, Teachers’ Employer Bargaining Association (TEBA) and a third-party mediator to propose a recommended agreement.

“We are very disappointed that the Alberta Teachers’ Association refused this offer. Teachers and students should also be disappointed.

“PBCO made this offer to the ATA because the union has not made a reasonable offer and this strike is impacting students. Alberta’s government is trying to put kids first and bring an end to this strike.

“The offer of enhanced mediation provided a clear path to ending it.

“We want the same things as the ATA: More teachers. More pay for teachers. More educational assistants. And more classrooms.

“This strike has gone on too long and we are extremely concerned about the impact it is having on students.

“We are willing to consider further options to ensure that our next generation gets the world-class education they deserve. After about three weeks, a strike of this nature would reach the threshold of causing irreparable harm to our students’ education.

“The ATA needs to do what is right for its members, and for all Alberta students.

“If it refuses to do so, we will consider further options to bring this strike to an end.”

Diploma exam update

November diploma exams will be optional for students.

With instructional time in schools disrupted due to the teacher strike, the November 2025 diploma exams will now be optional for students. Students who wish to write a diploma exam may request to do so, and their school boards will accommodate the request.

The optional diploma exams apply to all schools provincewide. These exams will still take place on the currently scheduled dates.

Students who choose not to write the November diploma exams can still complete their courses and graduate on time. Their final grade will be based entirely on the school-awarded mark provided by their teacher.

Choosing not to write the November diploma exams will not affect a student’s ability to apply to, be accepted by, or attend post-secondary institutions after graduation.

No changes have been made to the January and June diplomas and provincial achievement tests.

Quick facts

  • Students are automatically exempted from writing the November diploma exams but can request to write them.
  • School boards must allow the student to write the diploma exam if requested.

Continue Reading

Alberta

Alberta taxpayers should know how much their municipal governments spend

Published on October 16, 2025

By

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.

Tegan Hill

Director, Alberta Policy, Fraser Institute

Austin Thompson

Senior Policy Analyst, Fraser Institute
Continue Reading

Trending

X