Regional Plan For Southern Alberta Phase I Feedback
Doug Sephton provided these comments
1a In your opinion, what should the priorities be for the SSRP? Please rank from the highest priority (1) to the lowest priority. If you have other priorities that are not identified in the following list, please add them in the blank spaces and then rank them.
1 Increased protection of surface water
2 Increased protection of ground water
3 Greater conservation of ecologically sensitive areas
4 Increased recreation opportunities
5 Other priorities - preservation of natural habitat
6 Improved air quality
7 Reduction in the loss of agricultural lands
8 Strong economic development
Comments:
You need to define what you mean by "economic development". You can't have industrial (resource) development in a natural area if you want to encourage the spending on recreation and tourism activities in that area. Bragg Creek is a gateway to Kananaskis. It depends on people drawn to the natural attractions of the area to prosper. If you allow extensive clearcut logging, as you have in Sibbald, people won't want to visit the area and Bragg Creek will lose business to Canmore and Banff. I would like to rank Economic Development higher, but you don't appear to see tourism, recreation, real estate and other industries like retail and film production as economic development. I am assuming you mean forestry and oil & gas (resource development) when you refer to economic development. That's antiquated thinking. You should encourage encourage social, cultural and recreational interests in an area adjacent to a city of 1-million people. There is far more value in the water and the economic value added to the lives of the people of Calgary by providing high valued natural area adjacent to the city than there is in board-feet of lumber. You may be able to make a case for the value of the carbon, but I think you sell us short when you do that.
2 After reading Pages 16 to 21 of the SSRP terms of reference, how important do you feel each of the following are to sustaining economic growth in the South Saskatchewan Region? Please rate you answers on the scale from not at all important to very important.
1 Not at all important
2 Somewhat unimportant
3 Neither important nor unimportant
4 Somewhat important
5 Very important
Don't know
Agriculture - 2
Energy production - 1
Forestry - 1
Tourism and recreation - 5
2a For each of the major economic activities within the South Saskatchewan Region, please identify what you believe will ensure their success into the future.
Agriculture: In its place - not in Kananaskis
Energy production: In its place - not in Kananaskis
Forestry: In its place - not in Kananaskis
Tourism and recreation: The growth opportunities lie in increasing social values. Resource industries played an important role in Kananaskis 20 years ago and they form an important part of the economic mix. Times have changed. The economy of the area has changed and there are social and cultural issues that need to be addressed. If you allow resource industries to continue to dominate public policy, as you now do, you will undermine the social, cultural and human values that will provide enduring long-term growth and diversification opportunities for Alberta.
2a Are there any other sectors that you feel may emerge in the future that will be important to the region?
You ignore real estate and retail as well as a host of other values and activities (weddings). There are many consultants and knowledge based activities located in the foothills (me included). When I look out my window at a clearcut slope or walk/ski past a flare stack, I get discouraged and think that I want to move to Vancouver Island. Knowledge based industries are mobile. We don't need to live and work in a province that places resource development above human values like beauty and serenity. You don't need to exploit every last cm of land. Leave some for people to enjoy.
That sense of place extends beyond economic value. People are drawn here because the Rockies and the foothills are beautiful. If you despoil them, people will abandon the province and go looking for meaning and value elsewhere.
3. In your opinion, should the balance between public benefits and private property rights be:
maintained as it is currently
shifted toward greater public benefits
shifted toward greater private property rights
Comments: I don't know what you mean by public. My guess is that when you say public benefits you mean to say private companies' benefits.
You need to recognize Kananaskis as a unique case. Kananaskis should be set aside as a public trust. Private interests including agriculture, oil & gas and forestry are trampling on a highly valued public land 1/2-hour from a city of a million people (the public). The Elbow Valley is the most popular recreation area in all of Alberta and you encourage private interests to despoil it and render it less valuable for the public interests that are its rightful owners.
4a In your opinion, what are the three most important landscapes (e. g. physical areas or features) in the South Saskatchewan Region that should be considered for conservation?
Landscape 1: Watershed
Based on the criteria outlined in the SSRP Terms of Reference*, why do you think this landscape should be conserved? (Select all that apply)
* area permits the function of ecological processes (e. g., riparian zones, native prairies, forests)
* area supports the desired biological diversity in the region (e. g., landforms, species, vegetation) including important wildlife habitat and areas that enable movement of wildlife populations
* landscape provides visual value
* landscape provides cultural value
* landscape provides economic value
area is of sufficient size
* area providing landscape connectivity
area has little or no industrial activity
area supports Aboriginal traditional land uses
other
Landscape 2: Foothills
Based on the criteria outlined in the SSRP Terms of Reference*, why do you think this landscape should be conserved? (Select all that apply)
* area permits the function of ecological processes (e. g., riparian zones, native prairies, forests)
* area supports the desired biological diversity in the region (e. g., landforms, species, vegetation) including important wildlife habitat and areas that enable movement of wildlife populations
* landscape provides visual value
* landscape provides cultural value
* landscape provides economic value
* area is of sufficient size
* area providing landscape connectivity
area has little or no industrial activity
area supports Aboriginal traditional land uses
other
Landscape 3: Prairie
Based on the criteria outlined in the SSRP Terms of Reference*, why do you think this landscape should be conserved? (Select all that apply)
* area permits the function of ecological processes (e. g., riparian zones, native prairies, forests)
area supports the desired biological diversity in the region (e. g., landforms, species, vegetation) including important wildlife habitat and areas that enable movement of wildlife populations
landscape provides visual value
* landscape provides cultural value
* landscape provides economic value
* area is of sufficient size
* area providing landscape connectivity
* area has little or no industrial activity
* area supports Aboriginal traditional land uses
other
5a Understanding that the Eastern Slopes and Badlands are already recognized as significant recreation and tourism destinations, identify two other regionally significant areas or features that should be considered high value tourism and recreation locations.
Location 1: Kananaskis Elbow Valley
Why should it be considered a high value regional tourism and recreation area or feature?
You clearly don't recognize its value for tourism and recreation or you wouldn't allow a logging company to destroy trails and deforest the landscape. It is the most popular recreation area in Alberta.
Location 2: Kananaskis Sibbald
Why should it be considered a high value regional tourism and recreation area or feature?
It contains part of the Trans Canada trail. The logging company ploughed the Trans Canda Trail under to make way for a logging road. The TCT forms part of our national heritage - it is a backbone of our identity as Canadians. Why are you destroying it?
5b What advice would you provide the GoA to maintain the integrity of high value regional recreation and tourism lands in the SSR?
Why don't you recognize the political benefit you would get from declaring the Elbow Valley watershed off limits to industrial development (protect the environment) when you are perpetrating a world-class environmental catastrophy in the Tar Sands. You should show at least some semblance of environmental and social stewardship.
5c Within the areas you previously identified as "high value regional tourism or recreation areas or features" (location 1 and location 2), what enhancements or upgrading are required?
Location 1: Stop commercial logging. Invest in trail and facility development. I'm pretty sure you have excellent biological and environmental studies and plans to preserve and protect the area. Invoke them.
Location 2: Stop commercial logging. Stop lying to us about the threat of the pine beetle and forest fires and invest in forest management that values preservation of natural habitat above commercial development.
5d What advice would you give to better manage recreation activities on public land?
Transfer jurisdiction for the areas of Kananaskis that fall under the mandate of Sustainable Resource Development to the Department of Tourism, Parks and Recreation.
6 Do you have any final comments or recommendations for the GoA?
I worked for several years trying to raise awareness and encourage the government to act responsibly with respect to creation of a park in Kananaskis. Hundreds of letters were written, thousand of signatures were added to a petition, thousands of "Tag-A-Tree" signs were hung. Thousands of people called for creation of a park in northeastern Kananaskis - we were ignored.