Whistler Nordic Center: A systems perspective of the Callaghan Valley EIA Process Dan Kellar Wilfrid Laurier University October 20 th 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

Lake Placid Ski Jump Site

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

Methodology - Conceptual Model

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 - Influence Diagram

Methodology - Catastrophe Model

Methodology - Panarchy Model #1 Historical

Methodology - Panarchy Model #1 Present

Methodology - Panarchy Model #3 Future

Methodology - Catastrophe Model

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 : The paper is available at: