CANMORE – More than a hundred people showed up to the Town of Canmore’s regular council meeting to further understand why an approval for a wildlife corridor in Three Sisters has gone through seemingly under the radar.
Three Sisters Mountain Village (TSMV) announced Friday (Feb. 28) it had received approval from the Alberta government for a controversial wildlife corridor in its development area, with local scientists, conservationists and even Town of Canmore council members indicating the approval was a complete shock.
“This is a 28-year-old decision … So a lot has changed in our community – real estate market, state of housing in our community, etc. there’s a whole lot of things that have changed,” said Councillor Joanna McCallum during Tuesday's (Mar. 3) council meeting.
“I think what I hear a lot from my constituents is that they’re wondering if this is actually relevant anymore based on what is continuing to be coming forward from the developer on these lands.”
The issue dates back to the 1992 Natural Resources Conservation Board decision to approve a new recreation and tourism project in the Bow Valley. It included conditions to incorporate into its detailed design plan the provision for wildlife movement corridors “in as undeveloped a state as possible.” Over time, TSMV established wildlife corridors in sections as development moved down the valley. The Smith Creek corridor is the final one needed by TSMV to complete its development area.
TSMV and the Alberta government said it addressed previous feedback it received when the application was denied in 2018, including a realignment of the Across Valley Corridor to place it over an area with creeks. A wildlife crossing will also be added under the Trans-Canada highway, leading to habitat surrounding the Bow River.
Alberta’s deputy minister for environment and parks, Rick Blackwood, who presented the decision to council, said work will still need to be done in the next 24 months to help facilitate wildlife.
Coun. McCallum expressed distaste in the process, indicating the Town had only been alerted to the decision a few days before the council meeting.
“Will it be after that 24 months that the Town would expect to receive an area structure plan or redevelopment plan of submission, or during that time?” asked Coun. McCallum.
“My next question is the NRCB decision itself. It is titled Application to Construct a Recreational and Tourism Project in the Town of Canmore, Alberta. So when the area structure plan comes forward, if what we see is not a tourism project, recreation and tourism project… What kind of recourse does the Town of Canmore have?”
Yellowstone to Yellowstone Conservation Initiative (Y2Y) representatives said they knew nothing about the decision either, adding they don’t believe it reflects recent wildlife science.
“As a whole, we feel like it’s a political decision,” said Hilary Young, Y2Y’s senior Alberta program manager.
“We feel like it is not reflecting current up to date wildlife science, which is ever proliferating, ever increasing. We know a lot more than we knew in 1992, certainly, but even a lot more than we knew a few years ago, and so it’s clear to us that this decision is not reflecting that best wildlife science.”
In addition to this, Young said Y2Y tried numerous times to obtain data TSMV and the Alberta government said has been done, but has been unable to receive it – despite going through the appropriate data-sharing process set up by the province and sending many emails.
David Taylor, TSMV president, denied accusations the application was done stealthily, or that TSMV had denied data, indicating it was “co-mingled” data and Y2Y had just not gone through the appropriate process to get it.
“I have personally had four conversations with Y2Y, I was involved in the conversations for the alternate corridor with the senior people of Y2Y,” he said.
“When they first presented to us, we said we just had – both sides said – we had to make sure our constituents were on side. I went back and talked to our science people – I’m not a biologist – and I talked to my ownership group… They reached out and asked if they could see the data, because it’s co-mingled, we needed to ask the province – they had to get the approval from the province.”
Blackwood also indicated Y2Y was unable to come to an agreement internally, which is, according to him, why it wasn’t further consulted on the issue. However, Harvey Locke, a community member as well as a former lawyer for the Natural Resources Conservation Board (NRCB) who said he worked on this exact case in 1992 when the wildlife corridor first came to light, said this is a lie.
“I was deeply troubled by what I heard,” said Locke.
“I heard they couldn’t meet their own criteria for corridor width. I heard them say that Yellowstone to Yukon couldn’t get its act together; therefore they pulled ahead with this decision. I know the actual facts are that a request to the province was made for the data, which they said might be available now, but they wouldn’t provide the data to allow anybody to have a conversation and it was mind-blowing to hear them blame Yellowstone to Yukon for this decision with inadequate corridor width.”
During the council meeting, Coun. McCallum asked about this data as well.
“In your decision, you refer to the scientific literature that you have used and referred to to make your decision, yet you don’t provide any reference to it,” she said.
“Is there going to be a spot on the AEP website where members of the public can review the literature that you have considered?”
Blackwood said a bibliography will be provided and members of the public will now be able to access it through the AEP website after signing a data-sharing agreement.
In 2018, 17 months after the initial application was submitted, AEP denied the application, stating the width of the proposed corridor at the eastern end of Smith Creek is "not satisfactory."
“The application contains several positive aspects to maintain wildlife movement, but there are deficiencies which must be addressed to ensure that the wildlife corridor will achieve the purposes stated above over the very long-term,” the decision issued June 26, 2018 read.
At that time, the province sought public input on the proposal, which included a review of 439 letters as well as two public information sessions. Young said the majority of these letters, available publicly, were overwhelmingly against the wildlife corridor as it was.
TSMV said it addressed previous feedback it received when the application was denied in 2017, including a realignment of the Across Valley Corridor to place it over an area with creeks, as well as to add a wildlife crossing under the Trans-Canada Highway leading to habitat surrounding the Bow River.
Next steps in the process won't take place until TSMV submits applications for its Area Structure Plan (ASP) for Smith Creek and Three Sisters Mountain Village, at which time said applications would then be reviewed by the Town's planning department. The ASP's would then require first reading, which can only be done at a Town business meeting held on the first Tuesday of the month. Following this and if the ASP passes, a public hearing would be scheduled. A second and third reading would then be scheduled.
