240 likes | 326 Views
Whistler Nordic Center: A systems perspective of the Callaghan Valley EIA Process. Dan Kellar Wilfrid Laurier University October 20 th 2007. Outline. Introduction Historical Overview Biophysical Cultural-historical Socio-economic Challenges faced in the system Methodology
E N D
Whistler Nordic Center:A systems perspective of the Callaghan Valley EIA Process Dan Kellar Wilfrid Laurier University October 20th 2007
Outline • Introduction • Historical Overview • Biophysical • Cultural-historical • Socio-economic • Challenges faced in the system • Methodology • Literature Review • EIA, CEA, and SEA • Influence Diagrams • Conceptual Model • Catastrophe Models • Panarchy Model • Conclusions
Historical Overview • Introduction: • Located within the Callaghan Valley in the Costal Mountain range in British Columbia • Whistler Olympic Nordic centre for the 2010 Winter Olympic Games. • Approved under the harmonized review process of the CEA Act and the British Columbia EA Act. • The trails and facilities will remain intact and active after the Olympic Games
Historical Overview • Biophysical: • Parts of the valley have been logged before leaving a mix of re-growth and old growth forest • The area is on historical native lands (Lil’wat and Squamish Nations) and is home to a wide array of birds, mammals, aquatic life (EBA, 2004) and first class habitat. • 50°7' N, 123°6' W • 10 km west of Whistler, • Accessed by a turnoff from Highway #99, about 20 km south of Whistler. • It will occupy about 250–260 hectares within the valley of Callaghan Creek.
Historical Overview • Biophysical: • None of the impacts were found to be significant by the consulting companies • CEAA and EAO worked in a harmonized process. • Assessment split into two parts as additional recreational trails required additional study.
Historical Overview • Cultural-historical: • some deforestation through logging, though large sections of old growth forest remain. • First Nations land claims to this area. • Discontinuities in the promises of VANOC and the EAO and their actions. • EIAs done for the Whistler Nordic Centre indicate that little to no negative impacts will come to the First Nations. • AIUS done for both FNs with the help of consultants.
Historical Overview • Socio-economic: • Past and present logging. • Source of income for FN through hunting/trapping. • Value of a spiritual place?
Proposed Changes to System • Clearing of a combination of old growth (38ha) and replanted forest • The construction of: • roads • utility infrastructure • buildings • parking facilities • paved and unpaved trails for snow-shoeing along with cross-country skiing and summer training • a ski jump facility (permanent) • three open air stadiums (at start/finish areas of the courses) • multiple outdoor shooting ranges for the biathlon event
Challenges faced in the system • The removal of habitat and introduction of paved roads, buildings and lights. • More human-nature interaction possibilities. • Not ruining the natural systems • Not polluting the system • Keeping the spiritually important places untouched. • Integrating Native and public concerns into the EIA, construction, operational, and legacy phases of the project.
Methodology - Literature Review • CEAA and EAO documents and EA Acts • Personal Communications: • Concerned citizens • FN representative • EAO and CEAA • VANOC and IOC Environmental statements • Citizen Group Web pages • Text: Panarchy - Gunderson & Holling • Text: Ecosystem Sustainability and Health – Waltner-Toews • Text: Science of Sustainable Development – Sayer & Campbell • Text: EIA: Practice and Participation
EIA • Supposed to be inclusive of FNs, Public, Gov’ts. • Incompatibilities resulted in 2 EIAs • Since CEAA was involved, CEA should have taken place. • Snowmobile trails moved to another valley – EIA did not mention impacts to other valley.
SEA • Project part of the Olympic developments • No formal SEA was done on the Olympics as a whole. • No CEA was done on the Olympic projects as sub-projects of the Olympic System.
Methodology - Panarchy Model #1 Historical
Methodology - Panarchy Model #1 Present
Methodology - Panarchy Model #3 Future
Conclusions • Drastic changes occurring in system • Despite best ‘science’ effects of change are truly unknown, or at least unreported. • Traditional FN use may be at an end due to the Development of the Nordic Center • FNs on site during construction to monitor. • “Spot Checks” by EAO not frequent. • Enforcement?
Conclusions • What is point of conditions if there is no capacity to monitor and enforce? • Harmonization difficulties. • “CEAA does not grant or deny certificates, they approve submissions” • Was EIA effective and inclusive? – Time will answer.
This presentation available at : www.beingthechange.ca/articles/callaghan-pres-cagont.ppt The paper is available at: www.beingthechange.ca/articles/callaghan-cagont.pdf