The BCMC's comments on the Garibaldi Park Management Plan Draft Amendments are outlined below. They are based on discussions by the FMCBC SW Conservation Committee, and on input from individual BC Mountaineering Club members.

You may wish to use these comments to guide your personal submission to BC Parks:

http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/bcparks/planning/mgmtplns/garibaldi/garibaldi_mp_amend_comments.html

We welcome your feedback on this forum post!

Section 5.2.1 - Land Management

1. What do you support in Section 5.2.1?

We support the recommendations in this section.

1. Is there anything you do not support in Section 5.2.1?

No.

1. Is there anything missing in Section 5.2.1?

There needs to be a free access route through the controlled recreation area managed by Whistler-Blackcomb.

Section 6.2.1 - Hiking/Backpacking

1. What do you support in Section 6.2.1?

We support building the proposed new trails.

1. Is there anything you do not support in Section 6.2.1?

No.

1. Is there anything missing in Section 6.2.1?

Existing trails need to be assessed for maintenance and improvements that may be needed. Resources should be directed to these requirements prior to the construction of new trails.

Section 6.2.3 - Mountain Biking

Due to the fairly recent origins of mountain biking, and the potential controversy over some aspects of mountain biking, the BCMC does not have a public position at this time regarding this activity.

Section 6.2.4 - Winter Recreation [Backcountry Huts]

1. What do you support in Section 6.2.4?

We support this section.

1. Is there anything you do not support in Section 6.2.4?

No.

1. Is there anything missing in Section 6.2.4?

As this section will likely be applied to the construction of the Spearhead huts, and use of this area continues to increase, it is essential to determine its carrying capacity. There may be a point at which the number of users must be limited in order to preserve the area and maintain a high quality experience.

Section 6.2.5 - Commercial Recreation Services Heli-Skiing

1. What do you support in Section 6.2.5?

We agree that no new areas should be considered within the park for additional heli-skiing and that BC Parks should work with the heli-ski operator to add value for other park users.

1. Is there anything you do not support in Section 6.2.5?

The BCMC opposes that “heli-skiing opportunities will continue to be a recreation service offered in the park”. The Spearhead has potential to become a world-class ski tour, in a category of its own like the Haute Route in Europe. As ski touring traffic increases in the Spearhead area, conflict with heli-skiing will increase. Heli-skiing is not allowed in Europe for obvious reasons of user conflict and no other world class backcountry ski destination overlaps with heli-ski tenure. Parks must have guidance which will allow them to discontinue heli-skiing in the park.

We disagree with the analysis that “the ongoing operation of Whistler Heli-Skiing is important to Whistler’s economy and contributes to the diversity of the recreational opportunities offered in the park”. Whistler Heli-Skiing is only one of many Heli-Skiing providers; only a small percentage of their tenure lies within the park and as such the economic impact of phasing out heli-skiing from the Park has not been demonstrated and is believed in fact to be negligible. Furthermore, heli-skiing is not a distinct form of recreation, just a variation of backcountry skiing but involving extensive motorized access, and as such adds no recreational diversity to the park whatsoever.

We do not agree that “the presence of the heli-ski operator in the park provides an important measure of public safety”. We see two main aspects in response to a serious incident: notification of the incident and response to the incident. Given that weather conditions may not allow for helicopter flight and rescue, self-propelled backcountry users rely primarily on self rescue and carry electronic emergency communication equipment (such as satellite phone or SPOT devices) enabling prompt notification of an emergency condition. Therefore we see no advantage in having Whistler Heli-Skiing present in the Park from an incident notification point of view. Regarding incident response, in the event of a serious incident requiring helicopter assistance, one cannot rely on Whistler Heli-Skiing being close by and in a position to assist immediately. In fact, should one of their helicopters be nearby, it would likely be carrying clients and would need to return to their base to drop them off and pick up Search and Rescue or medical personnel. These logistical limitations negate any advantage in having Whistler Heli-Sking present in the Park over other helicopter operators in increasing public safety through improved incident response.

The BCMC does not agree that conflicts between non-motorized users and heli-skiers “can be mitigated through appropriate hut siting”. Hut sites should be selected to minimize environmental impact and maximize public safety; there is no room to consider the concerns of commercial heli-ski operators.

1. Is there anything missing in Section 6.2.5?

The BCMC strongly believes that heli-skiing should be phased out of Garibaldi Park. Garibaldi Park is one of the last bastions of non-motorized access near Vancouver that can be protected and the continuation of heli-skiing in the park threatens this vision. As all non-motorized users can attest, motorized access by helicopter takes away a significant portion of the enjoyment of being in the backcountry. Heli-skiers and non-motorized backcountry skiers compete for the same resource, but with highly unequal access methods. As a direct result of the high efficiency of motorized access, heli-skiers “track-out” areas quickly while the noise of helicopters disturbs the tranquility that other users seek in the park.

As long as heli-skiing does continue in the park, an avoidance protocol should exist prohibiting heli-skiing in the park on weekends, holidays, and other peak times. Also, given that a helicopter can fly to another area in a fraction of the time that it takes non-motorized backcountry skiers to change their destination, the former must defer to the latter when both wish to use the same area. Therefore a non-peak time avoidance protocol giving preference to non-motorized backcountry skiers must be put in place and publicized with all users. Such avoidance protocol should provide guidance to Park Personnel on how to resolve conflict that will inevitably occur as long as heli-skiing is permitted within the Park. Non-motorized users must be well informed of this protocol so they can report to the right party any infractions by Whistler Heli-Skiing.

Until heli-skiing is phased out of the park, tenures should not exceed five years and should have strict conditions on their renewal, such as adherence to the avoidance protocol. Over and above this, renewal should not be granted if feedback from other user groups indicate that, through noise or “tracking out”, heli-skiing has adversely affected their experience.

Excellent comments Lisa, regarding heli-recreation in the park. I disagree with a couple of statements:

• Mountain biking is not a new form of recreation. It has been around since the 1980s at least. And, of course, bikes preceded automobiles. I think an alpine bike route has at least as much merit as hut development.
• I think heli-skiing is a distinct form of recreation from backcountry skiing. However, I don't feel it is necessary to protect it as a form of diversity. That is absurd.

Unfortunately, I believe from comments by park personnel at the open house in Whistler and quoted in Whi$tler Pique magazine in a December 2012 issue, the public comments are a sham. Parks has already adopted its position on all questions and will not be influenced by the public. In fact, I believe their decision on all questions was already made even before the initial comments period began earlier last year. You will recall from one of last spring's monthly socials that a representative of the ACC on the Spearhead huts committee admitted that the committee was in discussion about the huts with BC Parks prior to public involvement. I am tending to think at this time and after reading the Pique magazine articles, that Parks was already "guiding" the committee along the lines of what they eventually wanted to see. As to why Parks should operate in this manner, I have given it some thought. Parks anticipated a groundswell of opinion evolving about park development and so framed the discussion along the questions in the management plan. However, the twist is, they already had decided on what that development should be.

It is my guess that they decided development was going to be forced on the park anyway because of economic and recreational interests in Whi$tler and Vancouver, so they decided to be proactive.

Thanks for your feedback, Paul.

The compete submission from the BCMC is to include a preamble describing the club's longtime association with the park, which began over 100 years ago. In this context, mountain biking may be fairly new, however, your point is still valid. It is certainly not much newer than heli-skiing and it has much less of an environmental impact!

As much as possible, the BCMC's response attempts to represent views held by most club members. Opinions about mountain biking seem too varied and this topic could be divisive for the club. In this light, comments were omitted.

Here is the introduction that was not posted earlier:

Jennie Aikman, Regional Planner
BC Parks
PO Box 3010
Cultus Lake, BC  V2R 5H6
Jennie.Aikman@gov.bc.ca

Re: Garibaldi Park Management Plan Amendment for the Spearhead Area - DRAFT

The British Columbia Mountaineering Club (BCMC) has over 500 members who are active in all aspects of non-motorized recreation in the backcountry, including hiking, backpacking, climbing, mountaineering and backcountry skiing. Founded in 1907, we have a longtime association with the Garibaldi Area; the club’s first two summer camps, in 1910 and 1912, were based on the Paul Ridge/Elfin Lakes area and provided a view towards the Black Tusk area, which became the destination for summer camps in 5 of the next 6 years. In 1913, BCMC members constructed the first trail into the Garibaldi Lake/Black Tusk meadows area, led by club president Billy Gray, who also produced the first map of the region. The trail and map led to increased visitation and that year, the club’s honorary president, James Bishop, advocated the creation of the park. After much lobbying by the BCMC and other mountaineering interests, Garibaldi Provincial Park was established.

Since the park was created, our club has organized many official trips and camps into the area, and our members have visited the Park countless times on their own. It is hoped that BC Parks will consider the BCMC’s strong ties to Garibaldi Park when reviewing our comments on the Master Plan Draft Amendments.

Sincerely,



Francis St-Pierre
President
British Columbia Mountaineering Club

Actually heli skiing is permitted in Switzerland.  However it's very different than here.  Only a single drop off is permitted and the clients must ski all the way out on their own.  Drop off points are limited to specific locations only.  One of these drop off points is the summit of Pigna d'Arolla, which is right on the Verier variation of the Haute route between Cabane des Dix and Cabane des Vignettes.

Thanks for the feedback Paul and Scott.

Scott, you're right and we will need to modify the response.

Paul, the club is certainly not in a position to endorse mountain biking in Garibaldi Park and I'm not enclined to endorse a condemnation of mountain biking. I believe that a partial explanation for this polarized situation is that mountain biking has not been around for long enough for the club to better understand mountain biking and come to a better form of consensus.  In my view, cross country mountain biking is not all that different from backcountry skiing. Both are somewhat mechanized (and I don't believe that the mechanized aspect of mountain biking is the real issue anyhow), and both require consideration for other users when going down on tight trails -- in fact the same argument applies to trail runners and even to fast hikers to a certain extent. Regarding whether heli skiing is a different form of recreation or not, I guess it can be argued either way. The angle in the response isn't my own but I'm ok enough with it as the main point is that heli-skiing doesn't add diversity. Feel free to suggest better wording if you feel strongly about it.

One last point. There is a rumour out there that Parks personnel is in fact uncomfortable with the current recommendations and that the support for heli-skiing might in fact come from Whistler-Blackcomb lobbying in Victoria. Of course, this is just a rumour, but an interesting possibility. The rumour might explain why Parks personnel is quite keen to get more feedback... Need for ammunition?

Cheers

Francis

I get the impression that Parks' conclusion on mountain biking is driven by cost concerns. It would be costly to build and maintain the trails. It would also be costly to enforce proper usage (i.e. prevent unauthorized off-trail riding).

 Whistler Off Road Cycling Association (WORCA) would build and maintain the trails. I don't think it would cost Parks much.

That's also my understanding, Paul, that WORCA would build and maintain the trails. If Parks can accept that the cabins will cost over $1M to build, I'm not sure how one can then present the argument that mountain biking trails are too expensive to even consider... Surely it doesn't cost $1M to build a mountain biking trail...

It's also important to realize that the mountain bikers were not asking for access to the whole park or even the entire Spearhead (most of it is on glaciers...). I believe that the main request was getting to Singing Pass. In my vieew, that request is not all that different from riding up to Elfin Lakes from Diamond Head, which is currently allowed in the park.