Members of a federal environmental committee recently stopped in Jasper and Banff on a fact-finding mission to find out what works and what doesn’t work in Canada’s national parks.
The Standing Committee on the Environment and Sustainable Development held private meetings, Sept. 21, with the municipality, major businesses like Brewster, members of the O’Chiese First Nations band—located in Rocky Mountain House—and Parks Canada officials.
“Banff and Jasper have unique challenges with higher attendance numbers—they’re hitting their limits,” said Deborah Schulte, chair of the all-party committee and a Liberal MP in Ontario.
“(In Jasper) you’ve got a village trying to pay for double its size in terms of sewage and garbage and it’s all being thrown on the backs of the few people who actually live there.”
After talking with different groups and organizations in town she said the committee has a much better understanding about the issues facing Jasper and Banff National Parks.
“We knew there was a problem, but you don’t really understand the complexity without spending the time talking about it and being able to ask questions from a variety of sides,” Schulte said.
Despite the challenges, she said local organizations and residents also need to recognize that the tourism industry is a “gift.”
“It’s why you’re all there and can remain there. Locals were saying they respect the fundamentals of the park and the natural beauty that keeps bringing people to the parks—so there needs to be a balanced solution,” Schulte said. “There were a lot of creative solutions discussed at these meetings, but we’re not there to find the answer to a specific problem. We’re there to make sure we can provide a framework where things can be worked out by all these different groups.”
On a similar note, the committee’s vice-chair and local Yellowhead MP Jim Eglinski said one of the biggest concerns he heard from almost every discussion he had was about Canada’s 150th birthday next year, when admission to Canada’s national parks and historic sites will be free.
“Banff and Jasper are both already feeling the pinch of vehicle traffic ... what we’re looking at is ways to address that—do we want to take land and start making more parking lots or do we want to start looking at alternative ways of transportation?” said Eglinski, suggesting that major tourism companies should have more bus services, ferrying people back and forth from tourist hotspots.
“Instead of everyone taking their cars to the hot springs perhaps there could be a bus, or instead of everyone driving their cars into the parks perhaps there could be a parking lot just outside the gates and people could get bussed in,” Eglinski added. “It’s a very workable solution without taking more of a footprint from our parks.”
After speaking with some of Jasper’s tourism companies, the committee stopped by the SkyTram. Eglinski said it was during this visit that he spoke with some of the park’s tourists.
“I wanted to know if we were doing the right thing with our national parks—if all these attractions are really worth it,” Eglinski said, adding the committee also stopped at the Glacier Skywalk on its way to Jasper.
“People seem to really appreciate the significance of the walkway and the SkyTram.”
However, not everyone shares that same appreciation.
In June, when details emerged about a proposal to build a 107-km bike trail from Jasper to the Columbia Icefield, five environmental groups voiced their opposition to the project, fearing the paved trail will damage habitat that is crucial for endangered species.
“Sometimes we need to build things to be able to address a broad range of visitors,” said Eglinski, referring to tourism-based infrastructure projects. “Some of these things are good, but we need to be really careful—that’s the message I got from locals and Parks officials.”
Aboriginal groups near Banff and Jasper also voiced their concerns about the future of the parks’ ecosystems.
“We had some excellent discussions with First Nations groups. There’s still a lot of history that’s not great, but there appeared to be a willingness to move forward on a common ground—that ground being protected spaces,” Schulte said. “That was a revelation to me— rather than fighting about who owns the land, it seems that everyone wants to move forward and start protecting the land together.”
On a municipal level, the committee had an hour-long meeting with Jasper’s municipal council. During that meeting, Mayor Richard Ireland gave a presentation on some of the dynamics and difficulties of running a municipality within a national park.
“Nobody seems to be looking for more land—I never heard that. What I did hear was that the municipality wants more stability in terms of zoning ... They want some flexibility so they don’t have to go to Parks with every little request,” said Schulte.
“It seems Parks understands the principals of having a national park, but they also understand that there are municipalities that need to be run.”
While the committee’s meeting with Jasper’s municipal council was brief, Ireland said he felt it was time well spent.
“We talked about the ongoing discussions over jurisdiction with regards to land use, planning and development and how that impacts our ability to plan for a sustainable future for the town, which impacts the sustainable future of the national park,” Ireland said. “What it will lead to remains to be seen, but we’re certainly optimistic that there will be good outcomes.”
Schulte said all of the information they heard will be taken back to Ottawa, where the committee will draft a report with recommendations to the federal government this fall.
“From the meetings I saw nobody digging in their heels and saying it had to be their way or no way. What we did see was a need to move forward and a need to protect these spaces,” Schulte said.
“There are lots of opportunities for improvement now there needs to be a formula that everyone is comfortable with.”
Kayla Byrne
[email protected]
