It’s hard to envy the members of the Jasper Marketing Group. They are out selling an idea that will hit their target audience in the place it hurts them the most — the pocketbook. If a tourism authority is to be constituted in Jasper, it will require a fee, whether it’s levied through business licences or some other mechanism. 

A year’s delay in the transfer of business licencing from Parks Canada to the Municipality had tourism authority proponents musing about other means of raising the funds for marketing. They didn’t identify what those other methods might include, but for a “Tourism Jasper” concept to work well, it needs to involve mandatory participation, for members within the town and around it as well. If it does not, and members could opt in or out, the potential would arise for a single large property, be it hotel, attraction or ski resort, to influence the decision making process by threatening to terminate its membership and the substantial financial contributions that go with it.

The prospective design for a tourism authority includes a model for governing the marketing group that would not subjugate smaller businesses to the will of larger operators. Whether or not the correct balance between sectors has been struck through the proposed make up of the board of directors is a matter for debate at some point, but kudos to the marketing group for coming this far.

The possibility of legitimate concerns over organizational control is just one of the reasons to consider the proposal with a fair degree of caution.

Another is the resort areas that the proponents consider to be among their competition. When presenting to Council last fall, the group listed a number of locations across western North America, Whistler and Banff among them. If we consider geography alone, these locations are indeed our competitors. When considering the kind of visitor experiences offered, however, there are significant differences between Jasper and the two larger communities.

Efforts to battle for the Banff and Whistler-bound crowd on their terms would lead to frustration and failure. We don’t have the amenities, facilities or geography to provide a comparable experience for tourists, and that’s not going to change, thank goodness. Even beyond those fundamental points, the amount of money the Tourism Jasper group would be able to use for marketing is much smaller than the multi-million dollar budgets of the Banff and Whistler tourism authorities. Our modest messages would be lost amid their cash-driven cacophony. 

One of the most familiar refrains in Jasper is that we don’t want to be like Banff. If that’s true, then we should set ourselves up as co-operators with our Rocky Mountain neighbours, instead of competitors. One way to do this is by selling the unique aspects of the Jasper experience, attempting to convince international travelers that our community and Banff are not interchangeable, but rather unique elements in a complete tour of the Alberta Rockies.

Those responsible for marketing Jasper to the world have to be very strategic about where and how they target the limited resources they have on offer. The creation of a dedicated marketing body with a slightly larger budget should be a good thing, but that will only be the case if the organization is working towards achievable goals. Believing that we are really competing with Banff and Whistler doesn’t fit this bill.

Perhaps the details of the proposal leave us with significant questions rather than substantial answers, but it is imperative that members of the business and broader community remember that this is a proposal. A concept, an idea, something that can be debated and altered without calling into question the basic need that is driving the entire project. 

We agree that a specific marketing organization with a strong mandate and healthy budget would be an asset for Jasper. What is worth careful consideration is the Jasper Marketing Group’s claim that this must happen quickly. 

There is something to that argument. Every month and every year that Jasper does not take this approach, other areas that do have this competitive edge put it to good use, widening the gap that already exists.

Take Banff’s experience as an example. Their tourism authority has found its brand and market share under attack and believes the answer is a substantial increase in its budget. What this tells us is that the fight to maintain a niche in the market is a constant process. This initial push for the creation of a tourism body in Jasper is just the first step of what could be a long evolution and nobody should believe that $600,000 per year will still be the operating amount five or ten years down the road. Whether or not Jasper grows physically, the cost of marketing it effectively is likely to increase. 

Another element of Banff’s story is important, beyond the dollars and sense of their plan to raise millions of additional dollars in the next four years. As part of Banff Lake Louise Tourism’s process of developing this strategy, they received feedback from members on the way they made decisions and arranged responsibilities. South of us, they are convinced that their organization is headed in the right direction. 

Before Jasper takes the important and necessary step of creating its own tourism marketing body, it is crucial that the future membership — the business community of Jasper — is certain about its direction and priorities. Perhaps the licencing delay is a blessing in disguise. “Tourism Jasper” could and should be a key fixture in this community in the years to come and now, with no more pressure of an April 1 turnover, there is an opportunity to make sure that we get this right from the beginning. Let’s not sacrifice this chance in order to move forward quickly.