After Parks Canada advised Marmot Basin that a proposed exit trail for the Tres Hombres area would require a comprehensive study before being approved, the ski hill has pulled their application.

According to Parks communications officer Amber Pastoor, Marmot withdrew its application at the beginning of May.

“Our view is that the project would have triggered a comprehensive study according to the terms of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, and so Marmot Basin decided to withdraw,” she said.

The application, which came along with an environmental screening report, was put forward this winter and the documents had been posted on the internet for public comment. The planned development would have involved the removal of a small number of trees from the base of the Tres Hombres zone on the back side of Caribou Ridge, along the northern boundary of Marmot Basin. The ski hill claimed that the egress trail was necessary to ensure the safety of skiers and avalanche control crew members.

The plans outraged members of the environmental community, especially the Jasper Environmental Association, who claimed that the Whistlers Creek area that the trail would enter was “absolutely vital” habitat for caribou and other animals. Marmot Basin had included mitigation measures for caribou in the submitted document, saying that anytime caribou were seen in the Tres Hombres/Whistler Creek area, the trail would be closed. 

The JEA’s Jill Seaton was not calling the withdrawal a victory when reached for comment.

“We’re pleased that they are not going ahead with it for now, but it’s clear that they (Marmot Basin) want it badly,” she said. With a long-range planning review underway, Seaton expects to see the trail included in the next phase of the process, when Marmot present its site guidelines to Parks Canada.

“This is quite a big deal and it will be interesting to see those site guidelines,” she said.

Although the multi-step planning process involves several opportunities for public comment on Marmot’s wishlist, Seaton is not convinced that outside pressure for concerned citizens or dedicated interest groups will make much difference.

“I don’t think that Parks listens to the public comments, quite frankly,” she said. Seaton is also troubled by the fact that it took an outcry on the part of the JEA and other groups in order to convince Parks Canada that a comprehensive study would be needed.

“We’re not happy,” she said. “Parks should have known that this would require a comp study, but it took us to point that out and that’s incredible, really.”