Back in the mid 90's when they put the development limit on Banff, Copps, who was in charge of it, said exactly what you said "The point with Canmore is you can keep building because it isn't in a national park." As if a line on a map makes a difference to wildlife. You can't just keep packing people and hotels into the valley. You claim it's full of space, but it's not. There is an extremely limited amount of develop-able land, which is why they built a huge chunk of residential on an alluvial fan against all warnings form people who knew what they were talking about. Remember how well that turned out?
I actually supported culling the bear population down to zero in order to make the mountains safer for those that like to hike in the areas. It was discussed ad nauseam in a super old thread. I have softened on the issue in that I wouldn't want the bears harmed, but in my perfect world they would be removed from the national parks. So yeah, I just don't care about wildlife when it comes to these matters.
I mean, imagine how many animals lived in Calgary 200 years ago before this city was developed. I don't know anybody who cares about any of that lost habitat. I apply that exact same logic to Canmore. Animals can work around us.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzz
There are capacity limiting factors to growth, like roads, space to build, and yes, wildlife corridors. The more you encroach on them, the more negative human-wildlife interactions occur. But ya, you don't actually care about that anyway.
I grew up in Canmore, I watched it go from a town of 3500 to 14 000 people. And ya, I used to roll out of my back yard, hop on my bike, or go for a hike without touching a road. Now I've got to go farther and farther, traversing an abandoned golf course to get to some trails. Many are totally gone, or closed half the time for wildlife activities, becuase animals have been forced so far up the valley the only space left is where there are trails.
You say that as long as someone is willing to finance it, why should we care? Because take a look at the abandon golf course. They ran out of money after destroying the land. Now it sits empty, unusable by anyone and not even generating tax dollars.
Are you joking around with me? So you lived in a town with a sewer system, power lines, roads, stores, etc. yet somehow you're one with the land or something? Go live off the land two valleys over in a lean-to and then you could tell me how close to nature you are. The generation before you developed raw land to make a nice town for you to grow up in. We don't just get to stop it here and limit the number of other people that get to enjoy the area. As the town grows, it's incumbent upon the townspeople to ensure it's biggest employer - tourism - remains current and relevant to what people need and want now and into the future.
And honestly, who would want Canmore to be like it was in the mid-90s. It was a s**thole. I went out there to live in a 16' holiday trailer when I was 19. Pulled into the trashiest of trash campgrounds where there were ashtrays above the urinals in the public bathroom. I didn't even stay one night in that hole. Kept on going to Banff and just lived there instead. Canmore has only improved since then and should continue to do so. It wasn't a nice town before.
The Following User Says Thank You to Sliver For This Useful Post:
And honestly, who would want Canmore to be like it was in the mid-90s. It was a s**thole. I went out there to live in a 16' holiday trailer when I was 19. Pulled into the trashiest of trash campgrounds where there were ashtrays above the urinals in the public bathroom. I didn't even stay one night in that hole. Kept on going to Banff and just lived there instead. Canmore has only improved since then and should continue to do so. It wasn't a nice town before.
Says you. I'd take '90's Canmore over the current one any day. Some people appreciate different things, I guess. It's why my parents chose Canmore over Banff. Small town that wasn't flooded with tourists. Lots of families made the same decision.
The Following User Says Thank You to Fuzz For This Useful Post:
I actually supported culling the bear population down to zero in order to make the mountains safer for those that like to hike in the areas. It was discussed ad nauseam in a super old thread. I have softened on the issue in that I wouldn't want the bears harmed, but in my perfect world they would be removed from the national parks. So yeah, I just don't care about wildlife when it comes to these matters.
I mean, imagine how many animals lived in Calgary 200 years ago before this city was developed. I don't know anybody who cares about any of that lost habitat. I apply that exact same logic to Canmore. Animals can work around us.
.....
Hopefully it never happens. Talk about ruining the town. Oh and get rid of the exshaw plant too. Who approved that in the most used tourist corridor in canada.
You mean the one that was built when Canmore looked like this:
LOL at the NIMBY Canmore folks who think they're special flowers protecting nature from development despite the fact that they themselves were part of exactly this...development of this natural gem. Let me guess, the last development that should have ever occurred was the construction of your own house.
The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Frequitude For This Useful Post:
Don't stop with one casino. Build 20 casinos. All attached to mega resorts. Then we don't have to go so far to get to Vegas, we can bring Vegas to us... and with better views!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Makarov
And make sure all the casinos are connected to each other with one underground vault.
In case anyone is wondering, these are also dripping in sarcasm.
I actually supported culling the bear population down to zero in order to make the mountains safer for those that like to hike in the areas. It was discussed ad nauseam in a super old thread.
First of all, if you are spending any time in the backwoods, and still harbour a fear of bears or wildlife, you are a goddam idiot. Safety is easy. Don't pack in unsealed foods, stay in groups of 4 or more, and if you are alone, bring a can of bear spray.
Bear attacks just don't happen all that frequently.
Second, bears are what make the national parks, the national parks. I don't give a #### about views. I love in Kitsilano, and I have a great view of the North Shore every single day. What I do care about is spending time in an ecosystem that humans haven't completely destroyed to the point where the only point in going to a national park is to wait in traffic, and pay 30% more for awful food.
If it was up to me, they would increase park pass prices by 10% for provincial residents, and 100% for everyone else. Keeping people out of the parks is essential, absolutely, but we have to recognize that nature doesn't pay any attention to man's delineation schemes.
The Following User Says Thank You to peter12 For This Useful Post:
You mean the one that was built when Canmore looked like this:
LOL at the NIMBY Canmore folks who think they're special flowers protecting nature from development despite the fact that they themselves were part of exactly this...development of this natural gem. Let me guess, the last development that should have ever occurred was the construction of your own house.
There is a difference between having a house to live in, and building a gondola, a casino and a conference centre as big as the BMO centre. Is that hard to understand? It also matters when you are building on a shared resource for private benefit. If it is a net loss to the community, should they not have a say?
