Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee
Sorry who is in the fantasy world?
The person looking at the capacity of mountain towns, continual (large) population growth, large incoming immigration figures, desire for Albertans to diversify their economy (and being laughed at by people from BC for not doing enough of that, ironically) and then just straight up looking at a map and understanding that there are, literally, hundreds of thousands of bare pristine wilderness that, even if a new mountain town gets built, will still exist and thrive?
Or
The person that thinks the world of 8B people and counting will somehow suddenly agree somehow that growth is no longer a thing that should happen, people should no longer have kids, Canada should cease growth in BC / Alberta or accept that a hotel in Banff in 3 years will cost $4,000 a night, and never again allow any development in the hundreds of thousands of square kilometres of wilderness in the second largest land mass country on Earth and the least densely populated country?
To be honest, the anti-development rhetoric that comes from Vancouver / Vancouver Island constantly has me wondering what world they are living in.
|
What’s wrong with the existing towns that are underdeveloped? The whole crows nest pass corridor has been heavily impacted by mining already. The Castle Mountain area could also be expanded in existing town foot prints. Lots of room for development outside the parks that’s already been impacted.
Banff is popular because it had development AND conservation. Lake Louise and Johnston canyon are already unvisitable in the summer. The answer isn’t to pack more people in the 20 km wide bow valley corridor.
The idea of building more in Banff, Kanamaskis, Canmore, Castle mountain junction in banff, Lake Louise, Ice Fields or Jasper is terrible. We want to limit people in these areas so they are enjoyable.