Final Analysis of Lab 5
Environmental Assessment – Garibaldi at Squamish Project
Q: You are a natural resource planner who has been retained by the British Columbia Snowmobile Federation who was initially opposed to the proposed project. Your task is to examine the Environment Assessment’s recommendations and Whistler’s criticism to evaluate whether there is sufficient evidence to continue to oppose the project or whether concerns can be addressed as part of the project. Your requested to present your results in the form of a map and a series of answers.
The project that has been proposed by Northland Properties and Aquilini Invest Group should not be approved based on it’s potential disruption of protected environments. The project, a large mountain resort within the Garibaldi Park boundaries, would not be a positive addition. Currently this park is used for recreational hiking and camping, with no road access and no facilities. The proposed project would bring a large amount of development to the area. This raises potential threat to all the protected area in the region. This included Old Growth Forests covering 6.78% of the area, ungulate winter range area of 7.9%, red listed species habitat of 24.8%, and fish bearing streams and riparian buffers of 16%. Within the proposed project boundaries, 25% of the area is sensitive habitat, including fish bearing streams, red-listed species habitats, old growth forests and ungulate winter range area. One quarter of the total area is not a small sum, and would cause significant stress on these environments in the construction phase, operation phase, and decommissioning stages.
In analyzing the data, I merged all of the red listed species together in to one layer so that they could be selected with ease. Furthermore, all of the streams that are likely to bear fish were selected and given buffer zones as riparian zones. Old growth forest data and ungulate winter range data were combined with the above layers by union so that these sensitive environments could be overlaid on the proposed project’s area within the park boundaries. In the maps attached, the majority of the sensitive area lies below the skiable terrain, however, this would be where the majority of the development would occur for shops, accommodations, restaurants etc. These areas would see the most development and the most destruction.
One of the largest concerns for this project is that red-listed species habitats cover just under a quarter of the projects area, 24.8%. Furthermore, these habitats are generally linked together, rather than pockets, and in developing this area the project would fragment these habitats from each other. Second, of the projects boundaries, 31.7% of the area may not even receive enough snow. This is concerning because the project risks so many habitats for something that is a growing uncertainty as climates continue to rise. The area already has a successful ski destination within an hour of the proposed project, and show not endanger ¼ of the area’s sensitive areas. Development in this sensitive area would speed up the detrimental effects of climate change to a rate that would not allow for species adaptation.
This area should not be approved for commercial development. It lies within a sensitive area and should be left to recreational exploration. Those who are compelled to see this environment can take the necessary steps to venture into the park boundaries.
Here, you can find a Close up of Project Development Site
Additionally, here is a projection of the Project Hillshade Map
Q: When working on environmental projects, you sometimes become involved in proposals you do not ethically believe in. Do you personally think the project should be allowed to continue?
No, I do not think this project should go forward. There are already the coast mountains outside of Vancouver, as well as Whistler and I do not think an additional ski development would benefit anything. It would draw additional resources, cause more harm to the environment, and likely all other resorts in the area would suffer from it. Additionally, the space they would like to develop on is not private and people already has trail access onto it. Those who truly want to go and ski the area are able to with the proper training and equipment.