Wheatland County is Treaty 7 territory. That is not a historical footnote — it is a legal fact with real consequences for the Goldfinch data centre proposal. Before County council votes on rezoning 576 acres of agricultural land for a massive industrial development, there is a question that needs answering: Has anyone consulted the Treaty 7 First Nations?
What is Treaty 7?
Treaty 7 was signed in 1877 at Blackfoot Crossing, a site of profound cultural and spiritual significance to the Blackfoot people. The signatories were the Siksika, Kainai, Piikani, Tsuut’ina, and Stoney Nakoda Nations — Bearspaw, Chiniki, and Wesley bands. The treaty covers what is now southern Alberta, including all of Wheatland County. It is not ancient history — it is a living agreement between sovereign nations and the Crown, and its terms carry the force of constitutional law today.
The Duty to Consult
Under section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982, the Crown has a legal duty to consult Indigenous peoples when it contemplates conduct — like a major land use change — that may affect Aboriginal or treaty rights. The Supreme Court established this in Haida Nation v. British Columbia (2004). The duty arises when the Crown knows of a potential right and contemplates action that might adversely affect it.
Consultation is not a courtesy email. Meaningful consultation includes notifying the affected First Nation, sharing information, discussing concerns, and accommodating them where appropriate. If the First Nation requests it, a traditional land use study should be commissioned. The provincial Aboriginal Consultation Office coordinates this process on behalf of Alberta.
What We Found — and What We Did Not
We looked carefully for evidence of consultation. We reviewed the County project webpage, news coverage of the July 7 public hearing, and Diode Technologies’ public materials.
We found no mention of Indigenous consultation anywhere.
No First Nations representatives spoke at the public hearing, according to press accounts. The County project documents make no reference to engagement with Treaty 7 Nations. Diode’s materials are silent on the question. There is no indication the ACO was notified or a traditional land use study commissioned.
This does not mean consultation has not happened. It means we looked and could not find evidence that it has. That is a question for County council to answer publicly.
Why It Matters for Siksika Nation
The Siksika Nation is roughly 30 to 40 kilometres from the proposed Goldfinch site, along the Highway 1 corridor. Critically, Siksika and the Goldfinch site share the same Bow River watershed. A data centre of this scale would consume millions of litres of water annually for cooling — water drawn from the same hydrological system Siksika depends on.
In 2023, Siksika Nation completed a Climate Change Impacts on Potable Water study that identified groundwater as a known vulnerability — documenting concerns about water quantity and quality under development pressure. Adding a high-consumption industrial facility to the same watershed, without consultation, raises obvious and serious questions.
The Legal Stakes
Canadian courts have made it clear: the duty to consult is not optional. When governments fail to meet it, courts have halted projects, quashed approvals, and ordered consultation before further steps can be taken. The legal path is well established — if the duty is triggered and not fulfilled, the resulting decision is vulnerable to judicial review.
In a 2021 decision, the Alberta Court of Appeal confirmed the duty applies to municipal land use decisions involving potential impacts on Aboriginal or treaty rights. Wheatland County’s rezoning of 576 acres of Treaty 7 land is precisely the kind of Crown conduct that triggers the duty.
If consultation has not occurred, the rezoning could face a legal challenge that delays the project and creates uncertainty for everyone. Addressing this now — before a decision — is the only sensible path.
What We Are Asking
Let us be clear about what we are not saying. We are not presuming to speak for the Siksika, Kainai, Piikani, Tsuut’ina, or Stoney Nakoda. We are not assuming their position on this project. We are not claiming to know whether consultation has occurred.
We are asking a question: Has the duty to consult been fulfilled? Every resident of Wheatland County deserves to know the answer.
Before council votes, we call for a simple step: confirm whether proper consultation has happened. If not — pause until it does. A decision this significant, on land covered by a treaty with constitutional force, should not be made without ensuring every legal obligation has been met.
The facts deserve scrutiny. The process deserves transparency. The Treaty 7 Nations deserve the consultation the Constitution requires.
Learn more at /the-facts/ and join us at /get-involved/.