240 likes | 328 Vues
Explore the environmental assessment process of Whistler Nordic Center in the Callaghan Valley for the 2010 Winter Olympics. Discover challenges, historical and biophysical aspects, and proposed changes. Learn about socio-economic impacts, cultural-historical significance, and the methodology used. The presentation covers a systems perspective, catastrophe models, and panarchy models, highlighting the complexities faced in integrating Native and public concerns. Conclusions delve into monitoring enforcement, harmonization difficulties, and the overall effectiveness of the EIA process.
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