The Eastern Slopes Protection Act declares the Eastern Slopes an area to be preserved for ecological, cultural, recreational, tourism and agricultural values, and directs stronger regional planning and consultation to govern future land-use decisions. The Act frames protection around Indigenous rights and watershed preservation and instructs government to embed those priorities into regional plans that cover the area.
For practitioners: the bill reorients how coal development is treated in the Eastern Slopes by tying future coal permissibility to new, prescribed planning and consultation requirements — signalling a shift from project-by-project approvals toward landscape-scale decision making.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill withdraws mapped Category 1 and Category 2 coal from disposition forever and treats Category 3 and Category 4 coal as withdrawn until enhanced regional plans set specified regulatory requirements. It bars the Alberta Energy Regulator from taking actions that would enable coal projects in those mapped areas, requires regional plans with prescribed consultation and cumulative-effects frameworks, and cancels many existing coal leases and approvals except for actively operating mines or processing plants.
Who It Affects
Directly affects holders of coal leases and approvals, the Alberta Energy Regulator, municipal and provincial planners, and resource-sector businesses with operations or prospects in the Eastern Slopes. It also imposes procedural obligations on the provincial government to consult Indigenous governments, local residents and affected economic sectors when making regional and subregional plans.
Why It Matters
By converting coal decisions into land‑use and regional‑planning questions, the bill prioritizes watershed protection and cumulative-effects limits over stand‑alone project approvals — changing how legal entitlement, investment risk and regulatory certainty will be assessed for coal in the region.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The Act defines the Eastern Slopes and four mapped coal categories by reference to Map 2 of Appendix 2 of Alberta’s 1976 Coal Policy (the map republished in 2017). Those defined terms are central: the statute ties legal consequences to the map classification rather than to ad hoc local descriptions.
The bill also adopts a supremacy rule: where it conflicts with other enactments, this Act prevails to the extent of the inconsistency.
Section 4 establishes an absolute bar for Category 1 and Category 2 coal: upon commencement those coal areas are treated as withdrawn from disposition under the Mines and Minerals Act, and the Alberta Energy Regulator (AER) is forbidden to exercise powers, duties or functions in a way that would enable coal exploration, development or mining in those areas. Section 5 treats Category 3 and Category 4 coal as withdrawn initially, but allows that status to be lifted only after an "enhanced regional plan" is in effect that includes regulatory requirements prescribed under the Act.Section 6 spells out what makes a regional plan "enhanced." The Act requires at least six months of enhanced consultation with Indigenous governments and peoples and the same six-month minimum for residents, municipalities and affected industries; it requires consideration and possible inclusion of traditional ecological knowledge, translation services to support elder participation, and the creation of a cumulative-effects framework with specific indicators, limits and triggers for water, land and air.
The regional plan must designate protected/conserved areas and areas where coal activity may be permitted, and it must identify statutory prohibitions on land use and linear disturbance as well as regulatory water-allocation rules to protect waters within the plan area. The Act also requires appointment of an advisory panel of subject-matter experts to advise during plan-making.On transition, the Act cancels many existing dispositions.
Coal leases and approvals that are valid immediately before commencement are cancelled unless they are tied to a coal mine or coal processing plant that is actively operating on the leased property; an additional temporal exception preserves certain Category 3/4 leases only if they were issued before May 1, 2020 and are tied to an active approval. The Act removes access to judicial remedies for losses arising from those cancellations — it prohibits causes of action and court jurisdiction to award damages for the cancellation — but explicitly preserves the statutory right to apply for compensation under the Mines and Minerals Act.
Finally, the Lieutenant Governor in Council must, within 12 months of a regional plan for any part of the Eastern Slopes, determine subregions based on reasonable linear-disturbance limits and make subregional plans that meet the enhanced requirements with necessary modifications.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The Act uses a specific map (Map 2 of Appendix 2 of the 1976 Coal Policy, republished 2017) to classify Eastern Slopes lands into Categories 1–4 and ties legal consequences directly to those map categories.
Category 1 and Category 2 coal are withdrawn from disposition on commencement and cannot be the subject of activities that the AER would enable; Category 3 and Category 4 remain withdrawn until an enhanced regional plan’s requirements are met.
An enhanced regional plan must include a detailed cumulative-effects framework with measurable indicators, limits and triggers for water, land and air, and must designate protected/conserved areas and areas where coal activity may be permitted.
Many existing coal leases and approvals are cancelled on commencement unless they support an actively operating coal mine or coal-processing plant; for Category 3/4 leases there is an extra preservation rule only for leases issued before May 1, 2020 that have an active approval.
Section 9 bars courts from hearing claims for damages or other relief tied to lease or approval cancellations, while explicitly leaving intact the statutory compensation route available under the Mines and Minerals Act.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Definitions and map-based classification
This section imports key statutory terms and explicitly anchors the Act to the Eastern Slopes coal classification map (Map 2, Appendix 2 of the 1976 Coal Policy, republished 2017). That map-based approach makes the spatial boundaries and category labels the controlling legal datum for all subsequent prohibitions and transitional rules, so disputes about where protections apply will focus on map interpretation and any updates to the underlying mapping.
Permanent withdrawal for Category 1 and 2 coal
Section 4 treats all Category 1 and Category 2 coal as withdrawn from disposition under the Mines and Minerals Act on commencement and prohibits the Alberta Energy Regulator and its agents from exercising any power that would enable coal activities in those areas. Practically, this removes the pathway for new approvals, lease dispositions, and AER-authorized activity in the highest-priority protected zones.
Conditional withdrawal for Category 3 and 4 coal
Category 3 and Category 4 coal are also treated as withdrawn on commencement but only until an enhanced regional plan sets out the regulatory conditions under which coal activity might proceed. The AER is similarly banned from enabling projects in these categories until such a plan is in force — effectively converting future access to Category 3/4 coal into a planning outcome, not an individual approvals outcome.
Enhanced regional-plan requirements and consultation standards
The Act raises the bar on consultation and plan contents for any regional plan covering the Eastern Slopes: at least six months of enhanced consultation with Indigenous governments and other stakeholders; consideration and potential inclusion of traditional ecological knowledge; translation services for elders; designation of protected versus potentially developable areas; statutory prohibitions on land use and linear disturbance; enforceable water‑use and allocation rules; a cumulative effects framework with indicators, limits and triggers; and an expert advisory panel. These are prescriptive planning inputs that will shape whether and where coal activity could ever be permitted.
Transitional cancellations and limits on judicial remedies
Sections 7 and 8 cancel many existing coal leases and approvals on commencement unless tied to an actively operating mine or coal-processing plant; Section 7 contains a carve-out for Category 3/4 leases issued before May 1, 2020 coupled with an active approval. Section 9 bars courts from adjudicating claims for damages or equitable relief arising from those cancellations, but the Act preserves the statutory right to seek compensation under the Mines and Minerals Act. That combination narrows litigation avenues while maintaining the administrative compensation channel.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on this topic across all five countries.
Explore this topic in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Downstream water users and irrigation operators — the Act prioritizes watershed protection and requires regional plans to set water allocation safeguards and cumulative-effects limits, lowering the risk of water-quality and quantity impacts from future coal projects.
- Conservation organizations and recreation/tourism operators — the statutory ability to designate protected and conserved areas offers a clearer legal basis to block industrial disturbance in places valued for ecology, recreation and tourism.
- Indigenous governments and communities — the Act mandates enhanced consultation, inclusion of traditional ecological knowledge and translation supports, which strengthens procedural footing for Indigenous involvement in land‑use decisions.
Who Bears the Cost
- Coal leaseholders and resource investors with exploration or development plans on the Eastern Slopes — many leases and approvals are cancelled unless tied to active operations, increasing stranded-asset risk and shifting reliance to the Mines and Minerals Act compensation process.
- The Alberta Energy Regulator and provincial planning agencies — they must implement the statutory bar, participate in enhanced planning processes, and incorporate cumulative-effects frameworks and advisory panels, imposing administrative and technical resource demands.
- Municipalities, ranchers and local businesses near the Eastern Slopes — while some will benefit from protection, others with existing or prospective economic ties to resource development may face constrained economic opportunities and uncertainty during the subregional planning process.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central tension is between landscape-scale conservation and the protection of watersheds versus the legal and economic rights of leaseholders and the province’s long-standing resource-development regime: the bill locks in environmental and Indigenous‑rights priorities by turning coal access into a planning outcome, but doing so imposes hardship and uncertainty on holders of prior entitlements and requires substantial new scientific, administrative and fiscal capacity to make the enhanced regional plans credible and defensible.
The Act tries to square protectionist policy with existing statutory regimes by using a map-based withdrawal and a planning-first approach, but that architecture raises implementation questions. Mapping accuracy and potential disputes about boundary placement will be consequential because the legal effects flow directly from map categories.
The prescriptive content required in an enhanced regional plan — especially measurable indicators, limits and triggers for cumulative effects — demands scientific baseline data and monitoring capacity that provincial agencies currently may not have at the scale and specificity the Act anticipates.
The transition rules narrow judicial remedies for those whose leases or approvals are cancelled, steering affected parties toward compensation under the Mines and Minerals Act. That channel may be slower, more technical, and politically fraught than litigation; it also raises questions about how compensation will be calculated and funded.
The combination of an administrative bar on court claims and the preservation of statutory compensation rights could prompt constitutional or statutory challenges, particularly from investors asserting regulatory takings or breaches of legitimate expectations despite the Act’s clear language to limit court relief.
There's more to this law than the bill.
Codify Laws traces every connection across the legislative lifecycle.