MEMO:
In order to assess the environmental risks related to the installation of a ski resort at The Garibaldi in Squamish, one must consider its vast spectrum of potential adverse effects to local biodiversity and ecological workings, and if such project does proceed into approval, extremely cautionary steps must be taken in order not to disturb the natural cycle of resource production and allocation. According to background information on the project proposal, the project’s original logistics and mechanisms were proposed in 90’s, and if approved, would take around 20 years to be completed in totality. Such a long period of preparation and construction may also provide additional threats to biodiversity and local habitat interaction; furthermore, with growing rates of greenhouse emissions and climate change increasing exponentially, one is forced to question whether such a locality will in fact be suitable to sustain winter sports activities in the future. Because of these concerns, my role as an Environmental Assessment GIS analyst was to map out the radius of the project’s extent and to highlight the potential sites for disturbance that the project may cause, with the objective of mitigating any possible consequences of the project’s progression. In order to provide such analysis, the use of ArcMap was vital to pinpoint the areas of greater risks, and that should therefore, not be meddled with. For example, through the software, and with the available data on the local species inhabitance, I was able to identify the areas in which there was a considerable concentration of endangered species (mostly along the northern part of the project, as labeled ‘FalseBox’). Furthermore, I divided the mountain area under analysis into two parts based on elevation: one part below 555m and on above 555m, enabling me, EIA agents and project proponents to get a better sense of where the most appropriate sites for ski-runs were located (based on snow availability due to elevation). Another type of analysis that was conducted with the use of ArcMap and GIS was the identification of areas that were at a certain distance from the various river stripes that are prevalent in the area. Such analysis is important because through such identification, project proponents are able to conduct construction in areas that will not affect the interaction of aquatic stakeholders, like the fish that carry their livelihoods along these rivers’ streams, as well as the surrounding areas of old-growth forest. The identification process was done through buffering all the lines (rivers) within the project area, and setting such buffers as a zone of no interference. My results included: proportion of the area that is composed by old-growth forests (6.77%), total proportion of habitat area of Mule Deer and Mountain Goats in the area (7.89%), as well as total percentage of area that is below 555m elevation (42.7%) and total percentage of the protected areas within the designated project site (14.32%). In my opinion, as mentioned above, the two greatest concerns associated with project developments are the potential adverse consequences to local biodiversity’s’ livelihood and interactions, which are vital to maintaining a healthy ecological system, as well as the uncertainty associated with the nature of this particular project, which is one of long-term duration and great-scale investment on a rather unstable period of time, climatically and financially speaking. One way to mitigate adverse effects on local biodiversity is through conducting thorough and precise Environmental impact Assessments through all levels of project analysis, which may include extensive biological research into the areas fauna and flora, as well as conducting surveys with encompassing communities (either First Nations or not) to get a sense of their opinion into the matter, which would both entail a feeling of being included in the consideration of new projects, as well as helping authorities and project proponents to get a better sense of the areas of public concern.
– Personally, I do not believe that this project should continue any further. Given the facts that river flow and biodiversity are in danger of being altered with the progression of this project, I believe that Garibaldi is in a state of delicacy, and should be observed and studied to enhance conservation projects, rather than the construction of another ski resort. Furthermore, give the site’s low altitude and the rising temperatures due to global warming, it is not far-off to suggest that in around 20 years time there will not be enough snow to practice winter sports, even during the peak of the season.