Thursday, November 27, 2003
Calgary's News & Entertainment Weekly
FFWD Weekly
NEWS
by Amy Steele
Battle over Castle resort expansion goes to court
The Castle Crown Wilderness Coalition is hoping a Court of Queen’s Bench judge will order Alberta Environment to conduct an environmental impact assessment on a proposed ski resort expansion in the Pincher Creek area.

Castle Mountain Resort wants to expand its ski hill and develop a town site with 137 additional housing units including a hotel and hostel, as well as pubs and restaurants. The resort also wants to build more roads, parking lots and RV lots.

This week lawyers from the ski resort, the environmental group and the Alberta government presented arguments in front of a Court of Queen’s Bench judge on whether or not the province is legally obligated to conduct an environmental impact assessment.

The matter was adjourned until December 5th.

The Castle Crown Wilderness Coalition says such an assessment is necessary because the proposed development is happening in a sensitive environmental area.

Executive director Jeffrey Emmett says studies have shown that the Castle Wilderness area has the highest biodiversity in Alberta and therefore it should be properly protected.

"This is a permanent development. Once we build a town it’s there. Now is the time to look at the environment. We have one time to do this right. This is such a significant place. Let’s not develop with our eyes closed," says Emmett.

However, Brian Cusack, manager of Castle Mountain Resort says the judicial review is a waste of time and money.

"We’re spending money we could be using on environmental protection to pay lawyers," he says.

The proposed development would take place right next to the West Castle Wetland Ecological Reserve. The reserve is recognized as having the best habitat in Alberta for bull trout, an endangered species. No public access is permitted to the reserve.

The Castle Crown Wilderness Coalition is concerned that an increased number of visitors to Castle Mountain Resort after its expansion could threaten the reserve, says Emmett.

"We find garbage out around it now and there are 88 homes (at Castle Mountain Resort). If we have 140 more what will happen?" asks Emmett. "Someone might not respect the boundary. They might just tromp in there."

The proposed expansion would also interfere with a wildlife corridor which is especially important to grizzlies, says Emmett.

"This development totally puts in jeopardy the Southwest Grizzly Bear Strategy," he says.

If the development proceeds there will be a "huge chance of increased bear-human contact."

Fish and Wildlife officials have also expressed their concerns about how ski resort expansion could affect the area.

In a 2001 report, the director of the Prairie region division of Fish and Wildlife, Doug Clark, wrote that he had significant concerns about the effects of the proposed development on fish and wildlife, especially bull trout and grizzlies.

He wrote that the West Castle Valley area is a crucial wildlife corridor for grizzlies.

"Further habitat fragmentation will have detrimental long-term effects on the persistence of the grizzly populations living south of Highway 3, including those inhabiting the West Castle Valley," he wrote.

Clark also expressed concern about the impact of the proposed development on the Southwest Alberta Grizzly Strategy. The area is currently used to relocate problem bears, he wrote.

"The West Castle Valley-Middle Kootenay Pass area is a prime location for the local release of both problem grizzlies and non-target bears..." wrote Clark. "Development and subsequent increased human use in the West Castle Valley threaten the very core of the province’s current management practices for grizzly bears."

Alberta Environment spokesperson Robert Moyles says ministry officials are not always obligated to conduct Environmental Impact Assessments. The ministry can decide they are not necessary if they feel there is enough information available on possible environmental impacts that could occur with development.

"The (Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act) states that in some cases an EIA is mandatory and sometimes it’s not. Our director made the decision in this case that it wasn’t," he says.

Top |Table of Contents | Previous Page | Back To Main Index
Copyright ©2003 FFWD. All rights reserved.