UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Seasonal business diversification of ski resorts and the effects on forest management : effects on trees… De Grave, Arnaud 2014

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata


24-ubc_2014_september_degrave_arnaud.pdf [ 28.68MB ]
JSON: 24-1.0167213.json
JSON-LD: 24-1.0167213-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 24-1.0167213-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 24-1.0167213-rdf.json
Turtle: 24-1.0167213-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 24-1.0167213-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 24-1.0167213-source.json
Full Text

Full Text

Seasonal business diversification of skiresorts and the effects on forestmanagementEffects on trees and people due to a shift from winteronly to year-round business of ski resorts inBritish ColumbiabyArnaud De GraveA THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OFTHE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OFMASTER OF SCIENCEinThe Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies(Forestry)THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA(Vancouver)April 2014c© Arnaud De Grave 2014AbstractSome ski resorts are shifting their business models from winter-only snow-based activities to year-round tourism. This may be happening as a result ofclimate change or because of a change in recreationists’ behaviour, amongstother causes.This research seeks to understand the impacts of such shifts on forest man-agement in the areas surrounding the ski resorts. It investigates the effectsof these shifts on the boundaries of the the impacted land used by residentsand visitors. These effects are evaluated from an environmental impactpoint of view and also from a socio-economic point of view. The researchalso attempts to relate these shifts to factors such as location, timing andscale effects related to the size of the resorts. Four case studies were chosen:Whistler, Sun Peaks resort, Hemlock Valley resort and Mount Washingtonresort. In each case, opinions of stakeholders were collected through semi-structured interviews and the data were analysed by a method inspired bygrounded theory and Qualitative Data Analysis.Results identify factors and mechanisms that allow a shift to happen in a skiresort and propose dates for the two case studies where the shift occurred.The strength of the communities and their incorporation into resort mu-nicipalities are identified as critical factors. Forestry practices are found tohave been impacted by the shift because of a change of management valuestowards more recreation and visuals values. An increase of the amount ofstakeholders with varied vested interests in the forests is believed to improvethe forests’ management. The number of people experiencing nature duringthe summer months and their attitudes are believed to increase awarenessabout the environment. This increased awareness induces scrutiny and self-regulation through information technologies. Moreover, the quality of life ofshifted communities is shown to be increased and linked to a more environ-mentally friendly land stewardship. This acts as a positive feedback loopfor a successful shift and change in forest management.iiPrefaceUBC Research Ethics Board CertificateThe application for ethical review and the document(s) used in this researchhave been reviewed and the procedures were found to be acceptable on eth-ical grounds for research involving human subjects. This study has beenapproved either by the full Behavioural REB or by an authorized delegatedreviewer.The UBC BREB number is: H13-01328.iiiTable of ContentsAbstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iiPreface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iiiTable of Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ivList of Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viiList of Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viiiAcknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.1 Introduction and motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.1.1 Research hypothesis and questions . . . . . . . . . . . 21.1.2 Expected results and contribution . . . . . . . . . . . 31.2 What is land use planning in British Columbia . . . . . . . . 41.3 Potential causal factors for the shift . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71.3.1 Climate change as one of the main triggers . . . . . . 91.3.2 Visitors’ behavioural change as an opportunity . . . . 111.3.3 Economic/demographic changes and diversification op-portunities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131.3.4 Are there really causal factors? . . . . . . . . . . . . 142 Case studies and social science methods . . . . . . . . . . . 172.1 Towards qualitative research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172.2 Methods of investigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192.2.1 The need for case studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192.2.2 Qualitative research tools - reflections about sampling 212.2.3 Participant observation as a way to gather information 252.2.4 Coming up with the interview questions . . . . . . . . 262.2.5 After sampling - Tools for qualitative data analysis . 29ivTable of Contents3 Case studies - geographical description of the four resorts 333.1 Preliminary remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 333.2 Whistler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 363.3 Hemlock Resort . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 413.4 Mount Washington resort . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 423.5 Sun Peaks resort . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 444 Pure data: results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 474.1 Top-down approach results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 474.2 Bottom-up approach results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 495 Research questions answered . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 575.1 The shift to all-seasons operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 585.1.1 A successful shift . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 595.1.2 Some external factors correlated to the shift . . . . . 645.1.3 Factors potentially preventing the shift from happen-ing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 705.1.4 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 735.2 Forest management changes due to the shift . . . . . . . . . 735.2.1 Boundary expansion and stakeholder involvement . . 765.2.2 Community-based forestry in relation to the shift . . 825.2.3 Logging roads as a shared asset . . . . . . . . . . . . 885.2.4 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 905.3 Environmental impacts and their mitigation in relation to theshift . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 905.3.1 Communities’ and tourists’ perceptions of nature changesdue to the shift . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 925.3.2 Anti-sprawl and densification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 975.3.3 Exceeding government regulations . . . . . . . . . . . 995.3.4 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1025.4 A link to the quality of life of communities . . . . . . . . . . 1035.4.1 Impacts from the shift on community welfare . . . . . 1045.4.2 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1066 Conclusion and perspectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1086.1 Conclusion: does the shift change forest management in apositive way? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1086.1.1 Does the shift influence forest management? . . . . . 1086.1.2 Does the quality of life increase for the residents?What are the environmental impacts? . . . . . . . . . 110vTable of Contents6.1.3 What is a successful shift and how to do it? . . . . . 1116.1.4 Global conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1126.2 Perspectives: further research needed . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1126.2.1 Addressing the climate change issue . . . . . . . . . . 1126.2.2 How to compare tourism and forestry? . . . . . . . . 1146.2.3 Other mountain resort developments of interest . . . 115Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117AppendicesA Example of keyword table . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126B Consent form for interviews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128C Graphs of keywords from interviews, per case studies . . . 130viList of Tables2.1 Interview participants grouped by case studies . . . . . . . . 242.2 Interview questions with follow-ups and aim. . . . . . . . . . 263.1 Excerpt from the history of the “Three C’s” (Cooperation-Coordination-Confrontation, from 1980 to 2001, source Mr.Don McLauren. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 374.1 Description of the resorts’ business type . . . . . . . . . . . . 474.2 Environmental impacts’ perception per resort . . . . . . . . . 484.3 Perception of forest management change . . . . . . . . . . . . 484.4 Community forestry and RMI fundings linked to the shift . . 484.5 Opinion on the date of the shift for Whistler and Sun Peaks . 495.1 Monitoring report for the CCF in 2013. . . . . . . . . . . . . 87viiList of Figures1.1 Adaptation (or not) strategies for ski resorts in the face of cli-mate change, year-round tourism identified as an alternative[Bu¨rki et al., 2003, colour emphasis in the graph mine]. . . . 103.1 The locations of the four case studies (Google Maps screenshot) 353.2 Whistler development timeline (from Gill [2000], frame em-phasis mine) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 393.3 A Vancouver marmot photographed close by the resort ( c©BrynTassell 2009, Many thanks for letting me use the pictures,website: http://www.bryntassell.ca/.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 433.4 3 yama, 1 mura, subete no kisetsu, desu ne? Japanese websitefor Sun Peaks resort. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 464.1 A very big and complex graph of keyword interactions (fromthe Whistler case study). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 524.2 Graph of keyword interactions from the Hemlock Valley casestudy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 534.3 Graph of keyword interactions from the Mount Washingtoncase study. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 534.4 Graph of keyword interactions from the Sun Peaks case study. 544.5 Close-up on the graph of keyword interactions from the SunPeaks case study, focusing on golf. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 554.6 Close-up on the graph of keyword interactions from the Whistlercase study, focusing on golf. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 565.1 Perception of the shift’s period or date in Whistler. . . . . . . 595.2 Map of zone F03, showing multiple small openings . . . . . . 856.1 Scheme summarizing the forest management and environmen-tal impacts due to the shift. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1096.2 Scheme summarizing the shift mechanisms . . . . . . . . . . . 111viiiAcknowledgementsI thank the trees, they were always nice to me.I would also like to thank my committee members, from UBC and SFU,for putting up with me and for paying for my coffee most of the time. Iappreciate the opportunities I had to work with them and all our discus-sions. I am very grateful to my interview participants, from all case studies.I could not have completed this project without their patience and willing-ness to collaborate. There are people who really went to great lengths tohelp in each community and I am indebted to them; they know who they are.Also, I made friends and enemies and pretty much everything in betweenduring my 3 years (about that) in BC and some I do like (and some I donot like and most of them won’t care). Again, they know who they are, theones I like.ixChapter 1Introduction1.1 Introduction and motivationThe motivation for this research is based on the observation that some skiresorts have transformed a snow-based one-season (winter-only) business toa year-round business [Needham, Wood, and Rollins, 2004b]. Moreover,a change in the practice of some of the snow-related activities (towardsso-called extreme sports) has been proposed as a potential paradigm shift[Burgin and Hardiman, 2012] within the tourism industry and this changecould have an impact on the expansion of land base used by visitors andresidents alike. In the rest of this thesis I will often refer to that as “thesystem” and its limits as “system boundaries.”In addition, while a variety of ecosystem services are provided by moun-tain areas (e.g. freshwater, biodiversity, tourism ressources [Greˆt-Regamey,Brunner, and Kienast, 2012, TEEB, 2010]). These areas are very fragileecosystems, mostly because of the slowness of their regenerative capacities.It is reckoned that these ecosystem are not very well understood [GlobalObservation Research Initiative in Alpine Environment (2012)]. Ski resortsare often located in high-altitude alpine zones, making them vulnerable tochange. For instance, in Chile, invasive species such as Pinus contorta areinvading the timberline ecotone [Pauchard et al., 2009]; in Hawaii [Daehler,2005] non-native species adapted to cold are a problem; and in Australiagardens in ski resorts have triggered plant’s invasion [Williams, Hahs, andMorgan, 2008]. The ski/snow industry directly impacts ecosystems as sometechniques to prevent soil erosion on ski slopes also involve the introductionof non-native species, with unknown long term consequences [Tsuyuzaki,1995]. As Burt and Rice [2009] declare: “[n]ot all ski slopes are createdequal,” and making new slopes or expanding ski resorts has an impact onthe ecology of the system.Climate change (or global warming) has long-term negative effects onsnow-based recreational activities [Scott and McBoyle, 2006] that could11.1. Introduction and motivationmake the shift from winter-only to year-round business unavoidable. Al-though this thesis makes no assumption that climate change has triggeredthe business change, the importance of climate change as a driver of businesschange needs to be monitored. It is still definitely a phenomenon to monitorand take into account as a change agent.1.1.1 Research hypothesis and questionsThe main research question can be described as: how does a shift in seasonalmanagement of a mountain resort influence or change the way the surround-ing forest is managed? It can be split into 3 hypotheses and a number ofsub-questions. They are as follows:• Hypothesis 1: The business shift leads to an expansion of the managedforest’s boundaries from ski slopes to the broader mountain range.This expansion leads to ecological and socio-economic effects as abroader area will be used by stakeholders in the community.– Q1.1. What are the management challenges?– Q1.2. What management opportunities arise? Is there a positiveevolution in the level of ecological management of the system?For instance could ecological management improve to a pointwhere it could go further than governmental imposition. Is therea positive evolution in the equity of the socio-economic system asa greater number of stakeholders are included in the system?• Hypothesis 2: The business shift leads to a change of values’ weightingfor socio-economic management of the forests surrounding the com-munities. The forest may become a higher value asset for tourismand a shift in their management may be seen, enabling for instancecommunity-based forestry and multiple value management (away fromsole timber extraction business).– Q2.1. When the recreation business is mainly snow-based: Whatis the summer business and what are the main values used in man-agement? Could a shift be beneficial for the community withoutbeing detrimental to the environment?– Q2.2. When the recreation business has shifted to all-year-round:Are the values leaning towards modern Ecosystem Based Man-agement (EBM), involving integrated management, and beingmore ecological?21.1. Introduction and motivation• Hypothesis 3: The resort’s scale, location, culture and economy havean influence over the opportunities and challenges related to the shift.– Q3.1. Can scale effects be observed?– Q3.2. Is the shift geographically/climate dependent?– Q3.3. Is the culture and history of the community affecting theshift (mostly from the causal factors point of view)?1.1.2 Expected results and contributionThe first goal of this project is to provide an enhanced socio-ecological un-derstanding of the management diversity of the forested and non-forestedland covering the system area in relation to the two kinds of studied busi-ness plans (winter only and year-round) and the shift from one to the other.This might lead to identifying the mechanisms that ensure a better spreadof benefits (although wealth has to be understood as not only monetary butalso quality of life, “happiness,” etc.) if the shift proves successful. Basedon neo-institutional theory, businesses fare better in the long run if they arebacked up by social legitimacy and in this case ecological “green” labelling(Schuman, 1995 in [Rivera, de Leon, and Koerber, 2006].)The final goal is appropriate ecological and socio-economic forest man-agement in alpine zones supporting tourism community resorts. From apractical point of view, a recommendation list of facilitating factors andworking mechanisms is envisioned. Voluntary Environmental Programs (VEPs,such as the Green Slope program from the National Sustainable Slope As-sociation [NSSA website, 2012]) are similar, based on the study by Rivera,de Leon, and Koerber [2006], but they present pitfalls such free riding, etc.Little and Needham [2011] have assessed the impact of the visibility of VEPson visitation of ski sites by winter recreationists but an extension of the con-cept over the four seasons still needs to be investigated.The following indicators are expected to be part of what will be witnessedin a “success story”:• presence of Ecosystem Based Management (EBM, or equivalent) inthe land use plan,• part of, or in collaboration with, a National park (or Provincial, orequivalent),• presence of a community forest (e.g. Cheakamus Community Forestaround Whistler),31.2. What is land use planning in British Columbia• presence of VEPs within the community,• academic studies within the field of sustainability accomplished withthe community’s help.1.2 What is land use planning in BritishColumbiaWorking with ski resorts and the impact of their business models on themanagement of the surrounding forest is encapsulated as a global land-useplanning issue. In this section, tools for land-use planning that bridge thegap between society and ecology will be investigated. It is necessary tounderstand the tools in order to understand their use by people and to beable to make recommendations. It also seems important at this point to tryand define what land-use planning is. It has many definitions; here is theone given by the Canadian Institute of Planners1:“Land use planning means the scientific, aesthetic, and orderlydisposition of land, resources, facilities and services with a viewto securing the physical and social efficiency, health and well-being of urban and rural communities.”In the literature these tools are sometimes called frameworks and andthey are always labeled as socio-ecological. What is a socio-ecological toolor framework? It can be seen as a link between nature and society in thesense of Latour [1999]. Therefore the kind of tools that are considered hereas socio-ecological permit nature to be taken into account while planningland-use. They enable scientific recommendations to be integrated, resultingin efficient planning. However, a need for land-use planning to also comethrough public involvement and not just through natural science (e.g., list ofbiometric measurements of a specific forest stand) has been witnessed anddiscussed in the literature. For instance surveys, opinion polls (and moregenerally any brainstorming, check-lists, etc.), as well as computer-generatedsimulations of landscape future projection, are tools that are used to helpthe public be involved in decision making.The need for public involvement in forest management is especially im-portant in BC, and generally in Canada, because of the high percentageof publically owned land. Of course the situation is very different in other1http://cip-icu.ca (accessed/verified in March 2014)41.2. What is land use planning in British Columbiacountries, and even in eastern Canada. The difference between Europeancountries and North American countries is very important due to the historyof conquest and colonialism, with indigenous people (or First Nations) hav-ing been chased out of their land, nowadays trying to regain access and useof their land. For instance, Mukerji [2007] describes a part of the inventoryactivities in France in the 17th century and shows the effect of feudalismand monarchy on land property rights. The surveys tried to name, locate,characterize, and describe the forests of France but also mapped the distri-bution of powers. Mapping the country had a tremendous impact becauseit allowed the State to have accurate knowledge of the effective land baseand help mediate fights between the Crown, local feudal lords and peasantssometimes in favour of the latter. Ironically, history being what it is, a onecentury old scar is more difficult to deal with than milleniums old scars.It is increasingly accepted that forests are a public welfare “thing,” andthat governments should act to preserve them, or at least manage themproperly and most importantly with transparency. This implies an increasedinvolvement from the public in decisions concerning questions related to for-est management. However, this is not an easy thing to accomplish as publicopinion can be volatile, biased, emotional and, at times, irrational. Suchnotions of “care/cared for” feelings are important for the public but are dif-ficult to quantify and have recently been included in legislations [Nassauer,1995].There was (and still is) a need for tools to put some order in this chaosof feelings. More importantly, in order to be effective and lead to action,public opinion needs to be “manageable”. This leads to constraints suchas the ones explained in relation to the evaluation of scenic beauty [Daniel,Terry C. , Boster, 1976]. Moreover, Daniel [1990] provides a history of themethods used to evaluate intrinsic beauty of nature vs. urban scape in orderto be used in policy making and as a tool for inventory. In the 1970s, thejudgement of experts (e.g., landscape architects) was used but then a changetowards more involvement of the public was made. The use of photographsis common practice for practical reasons (easier to move pictures of the landto the public than the public to the land.) During surveys a sample of thepopulation would be shown a selection of scenic photographs and asked torate them according to their preference. However, as discussed in the afore-mentioned article and also in Kimmins [1999], this technique places a lot ofweight on sight, despite the assessment of a landscape being a multimodalactivity (i.e. involving other senses such as smell or hearing...). Ultimately,51.2. What is land use planning in British Columbiamost of these tools try to translate opinions into quantitative data (such ascurrency.) However, doing so does not cover the whole spectrum of opin-ions used in decision making (and besides, some tools and methods now usemulti-criteria multi-unit comparatives) as some values are not translatable.LUPs comprise prioritizations of usage of land and related natural re-sources (management as in access, what type of activities is allowed, etc.).They are created by a government body, i.e. on “public land,” with a focuson conflict mitigation (if land is private then theoretically there should be noconflict, except if said-land was acquired illegally with regard to “official”owners (for instance indigenous people)). It requires public transparencyand involvement, aims at equity, sustainability and welfare (both humanand non-human). In BC the history of land use planning conflicts is rich.Williams, Penrose, and Hawkes [1998, p.861] uses the example of the “Warin the Woods” events: “BC has been the site of some of the most contentiousland-use conflicts in Canada’s history.” It led to the creation of the Com-mission on Resources and the Environment (CORE) and later the Land andResource Management Plans (LRMP).CORE (active from 1992 to 1996) covered Vancouver Island, Cariboo-Chilcotin, West Kootenay-Boundary, and East Kootenay. The idea wasthat CORE would be inclusive (i.e., it would allow for public participation),address the range of values present across the Provinces landscape, and con-tribute to the achievement of social, ecological, and economic sustainability.Land use planning is to be understood at different levels, following azoom-like pattern: strategic land use planning is the highest hierarchicallywith decisions taking place on a provincial level. The goal is to prioritizeuses of public land: protected status, resource prioritization and allocation,etc. The geographical frame is of regions and sub-regions with LUPs forregions and LRMPs for sub-regions. Most of the strategic land use plan-ning is now done under the subregional Land and Resource ManagementPlanning process. LRMPs are applied land use plans which emerge after aprocess allowing for public participation and with goals of mediation andconflict minimization on top of sustainable natural resource management.There is no specific format for a LRMP even if an example of what couldbe a good plan was provided in 1995. For example the Sea-to-Sky LRMPcan be accessed on-line on the website of the Ministry of Forest, Lands and61.3. Potential causal factors for the shiftNatural Resources Operation2 and has been updated in 2008. I failed tofind on the website of the Ministry of Forest, Lands and Natural ResourcesOperation an easy way to see if this is still true and what plans was recentlyupdated. In 1999, there were 14 LRMPs in BC.From my point of view, CORE and LRMPs present the following issues:• Lack of a clear mandate given to planning participants,• Lack of representative consultation with their constituency groups,• Lack of coordination in cross-jurisdictional consultations,• Lack of respect for process by some planning participants,• Failure to implement policies that reflect consensus reached at theplanning tables, and• Political use of stakeholder funding.A number of more in depth analysis of LRMPs and other planning pro-grams/tools can be found in the literature but it is not the aim of this projectto go further in the debate. In chapter 3.2, a timeline of Whistler’s historygives insights on some historical developments of participation relating tothe creation and use of the Land Use Plans (LUPs) and Land and ResourceManagement Plans (LRMPs) with a focus on recreation values.1.3 Potential causal factors for the shiftSeasonality in tourism is clearly very important. As Jefferson (1986, p. 24)(in Higham and Hinch [2002]) states: “whether assessed in terms of lostrevenue or reflected as the enforced termination of employment, there is ob-viously a major economic and social dimension to these [seasonal] troughswhich evidently is in no-one’s interest”. Seasonality can be seen either froma natural (i.e. weather, animal behaviour, etc.) or an institutional pointof view (holidays period, whether they are religious-, school- or industry-based). However, Amelung, Nicholls, and Viner [2007] argue that there arethree additional causes of seasonality: (1) social pressure or fashion; (2)sporting season; and (3) inertia on the part of travellers, who continue to do2Sea-to-sky Land and Resource Management Planhttp://www.ilmb.gov.bc.ca/slrp/lrmp/surrey/s2s/plan/lrmp.html (accessed March 2014)71.3. Potential causal factors for the shifttourism at a particular time of the year even though they are no longer re-stricted to this period (the seasonal activity of pensioners is a good example).So the shift from a purely snow-based winter business to a year-roundbusiness is a sub-problem from the seasonality issue. Indeed, even if someplaces are intrinsically year-round, such as Mount Parnassos National Parkin Greece (which is a ski resort but also has a lot of heritage tourism associ-ated with the nearby site of Delphii), some ski resorts have been deliberatelytransitioning from a snow-based one-season business to an all-year business.According to Needham, Wood, and Rollins [2004b, p. 422]: “Operatingchairlifts at alpine ski areas in the summer to accommodate activities suchas hiking and mountain biking is increasing in popularity. For example, 12%of the ski areas in British Columbia (BC), Canada had lifts operating in thesummer of 1991. A decade later, summer operations occurred at 65% ofthese areas”. This is significant as some ski areas are receiving over 250,000visitors each summer. In Australian ski resorts, by 1988 50% of the tourismactivities occurred outside the winter season, with 70% of visitors sightsee-ing and car touring, and other activities including camping, bushwalking,paragliding and fishing [Burgin and Hardiman, 2012]. Could the shift toall-season resorts free tourism businesses seasonality issues?Some studies have moved beyond a simple explanation of seasonality toexplain the observed shift. The most frequent explanation is climate changeand the likelihood of less and less snow. The impact of climate change onnatural seasonality has been gathering interest, as shown for example by[Amelung, Nicholls, and Viner, 2007]. The second most frequent reasonseems to be a change in the practice of sport/nature tourism due to the ad-vent and increased popularity of extreme sports. The rest can be combinedinto what Scott and McBoyle [2006, p. 7] describe as long-term influencingvariables in the tourism sector such as “globalization and economic fluctu-ations, fuel prices, ageing populations in industrialized countries, increas-ing travel safety and health concerns, increased environmental and culturalawareness, advances in information and transportation technology, environ-mental limitations - water supply and pollution.” Some of these items aremore linked to the present chapter’s topic than others.81.3. Potential causal factors for the shift1.3.1 Climate change as one of the main triggersClimate change (or global warming) has been identified as having the mostnegative effects on snow recreational activities, to the point that some re-searchers use ski resorts as an indicator of its impact. It has been particu-larly nicely put as “The Canary in the Coalmine” by Bicknell and Mcmanus[2006]. Assessments of the impact of climate change on the ski industryhas been reported from a range of countries including Australia, Austria,Canada, Japan, Switzerland, and the United States [Scott and McBoyle,2006]. The French Pyrene`es have been studied by Vle`s [2012], Scotland byVarley and Medway [2011], and Sweden (particularly at risk as most of itsskiing is fairly low altitude) by Moen and Fredman [2007]. There are with-out doubts other studies in other countries. Meier (in Moen and Fredman[2007]) estimated in 1998 that the cost of climate change for the year-roundtourism sector in Switzerland would be 1.1 to 1.4billion US$ by 2050, hittingsnow-based activities hardest. Some other activities, unrelated directly tosnow activities but still dependent on climate have been identified as vulner-able: glacier tours, fall foliage (concerns about maple trees being replacedby other species with less vibrant colours), sport fishing of salmonid speciesand trout [Scott, McBoyle, and Minogue, 2007]. Other concerns includesnow/ice related eco-tourism associated with such attractions as ice caps,polar bear sighting, etc. However, Scott, McBoyle, and Minogue [2007] ex-plain that in some places year-round tourism activities may not be feasiblebecause of land use restrictions and some ski resorts still need to stick tosnow as their sole business.Climate change obviously has long term negative effects on snow recre-ational activities that could make adaptation and possibly the studied busi-ness shift unavoidable. Switching to a year-round business as often beenseen as one adaptation strategy. This is shown in Figure 1.1. However,many larger corporations can resort to artificial snow making to keep doingbusiness as usual. However, some snow activities will not benefit from arti-ficial snow making, such as snowmobiling (assessed in 2003 as a 10 billionsUS$ business for North America by The International Snowmobile Associ-ation) or backcountry/Nordic skiing. Such reliance on artificial snow willhave many cascading effects on ecology and on the local communities andthe year-round business shift is often seen as the “only sustainable way to goforward” both from an ecological and an economical point of view. Koenigand Abegg [1997] also believe that artificial snow making has been seen as away to compete against resorts without the equipment to make snow. How-91.3. Potential causal factors for the shiftever, their analysis was based on some poor snow seasons and at the timewas not linked to climate change.Figure 1.1: Adaptation (or not) strategies for ski resorts in the face of climatechange, year-round tourism identified as an alternative [Bu¨rki et al., 2003,colour emphasis in the graph mine].Vle`s [2010] states that in France the ski resort building “frenzy” in the1960s (up to 380 resorts were built) brought a large portion of the popu-lation to the mountains at a time when the mountains were deserted andhad a bad image. However, the infrastructure is now ageing and the chal-lenge is to progress in a sustainable way and in an environment less andless dependent on the snow-based economy. This integrates the ideas of thehistory of resorts with what is actually happening through global warmingand highlights the idea of location dependency.Varley and Medway [2011] Varley and Medway (2011) give an exampleof a small mountain resort in Scotland: Cairngorm, Scotlands sixth highestmountain, situated in a national park and based on the opening in 2001 ofa funicular railway. They report that there is snow for less than 6 weeks ofskiing on Cairngorm in most years. Diversification started in 2005 after aparticularly difficult winter. The vision of the resorts management board wasto diversify to four-season tourism whilst not endangering the environment101.3. Potential causal factors for the shiftand trying to do so via “ecosophy” (which is just a neologism based onecological philosophy, coined by Arne Naess3 considered the father of the“Deep Ecology” movement). The results of this study shows that the shiftto four-season, ecotourism (although they did not reach true ecosophy) is aviable way to go forward. This is another example of a shift triggered byclimate change even if was not directly associated with it. However, theydo not consider it necessarily a bad thing:“Rather than being viewed as a simple problem of a shrinkingmarket and associated economic turmoil, this is an ideal oppor-tunity to rethink the ethos of mountain tourism and to extendits demand beyond the short winter sports season. The proposedscenario for Cairngorm hints at what might be achieved here: amore inclusive, embodied touristic encounter based around thesympathetic presentation/ removal of the built environment andsensitive interpretation of the tourist experience.” [p. 909]This is probably a very monodirectional view, that of environmentalists. Aninteresting figure is that the funicular needs to run for 25 years to have itsbuilding costs (partly provided by the EU) recovered which could also beseen as as strong incentive to keep on going even if the snow industry diesat that particular location.My personal reluctance to accept climate change as the reason for theshift is that many ski resorts which are particularly successful already shiftedbefore climate change became such a political and ubiquitous notion, possi-bly before its appearance in the economic/research agenda. That does notmean that climate change is not accepted as an issue by the resorts.1.3.2 Visitors’ behavioural change as an opportunityHistorically, visitors’ motives for visiting and/or staying at resorts included“rest, relaxation and reinvigoration” but a change in the practice of someof the snow related activities (towards extreme sports) have been proposed3Arne Naess’ definition of ecosophy is the following: “By an ecosophy I mean a phi-losophy of ecological harmony or equilibrium. A philosophy as a kind of sofia (or) wis-dom, is openly normative, it contains both norms, rules, postulates, value priority an-nouncements and hypotheses concerning the state of affairs in our universe. Wisdom ispolicy wisdom, prescription, not only scientific description and prediction. The detailsof an ecosophy will show many variations due to significant differences concerning notonly the facts of pollution, resources, population, etc. but also value priorities.” fromhttp://www.ecospherics.net/pages/DrengEcophil.html (Accessed April 2014)111.3. Potential causal factors for the shiftas a potential paradigm shift within the tourism industry by Burgin andHardiman [2012]. This gradual change could have been a causal factor forthe shift to year-round tourism as recreationists adopt the same attitude to-wards their activities during summer, looking for activities such as downhillmountain biking, rock-climbing, hiking, scrambling, etc.Burgin and Hardiman [2012] place the emergence of so-called extremesports in the middle of the 1990s with the first X-Games (by US sport me-dia company ESPN) first “summer” in 1996 then “winter” in 1997. Thesesports have now been added to the panel of sports in the Olympic Gamesand attract an even greater number of people. However, I believe that thisjust reflects their arrival in the mainstream, the actual spread of these sportsand associated lifestyles possibly pre-dates the X-Games by a decade or so.For instance, and of relevance for this essay, is mountain biking.From wikipedia4:“The history of the mountain bike includes contributions fromcyclo-cross in Europe and the Roughstuff Fellowship in the UK.The name ’mountain bike’ first appeared in print in 1966 as’mountain bicycle.’ [...] The sport became popular in the 1970sin Marin county, California, USA. [...] However, it was notuntil the late 1970s and early 1980s that road bicycle compa-nies started to manufacture mountain bicycles using high-techlightweight materials, such as M4 aluminium. The first mass pro-duction mountain bike was the Specialized Stumpjumper, firstproduced in 1981.”Also,“The development of [white water rafting] as a leisure sport hasbecome popular since the mid-1970s. It is considered an extremesport, as it can be dangerous. [...] 1973, Tom Johnson, a racerand trainer from Kernville, California designs and markets theHollowform: the first roto-molded polyethylene boat. It wasmass-produced by a garbage can manufacturing company. [...]Hard runs became more accessible to less-skilled paddlers. 1980,the manufacturer Prijon in Rosenheim introduced polyethyleneto Europe which made WW boating virtually maintenance and4https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountain bikingand https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White water rafting121.3. Potential causal factors for the shiftrepair free in giant contrast to the Faltboot which had started itall.”Extreme sports started at the end of the 1970s and probably crept intomainstream and could be seen as an incentive to capitalize on infrastructureof mountain resorts in the 1980s. This corresponds to the date proposedby Gill [2000] as the official (as recorded in the resort planning vision) shiftfor year-round tourism in Whistler (in 1982). Furthermore, Burgin andHardiman [2012] state that extreme sports practitioners number close to “71millions in the US alone”, so meeting the needs of such a large group is a bigeconomic incentive. So I believe that the combination of a higher numberof people wanting to use the facilities in summer, the facilities graduallyadapting and the media picking the trends, all had a snowballing effect onthe shift to year-round tourism.1.3.3 Economic/demographic changes and diversificationopportunitiesPegg, Patterson, and Gariddo [2012] studied the after-effects of the busi-ness shift in an Australian alpine area and, while the causes were neitherexplained nor envisioned, one can extrapolate from their results. The studywas conducted with managers of small hospitality businesses. The majorityof interviewees acknowledged that there had been an increase in the numberof summer visitors each year which had forced them to make changes totheir operations. So from the point of view of a resort, small businesses orultimately the community, the change in visitor behaviour is a direct causalfactor in resorts becoming year-round businesses.Other “common sense” factors, mostly unsubstantiated, include the pos-sibility that skiing (or any kind of snow-related activity requiring specificand heavy infrastructure and personal equipment and necessitates trans-portation) is quite expensive whereas hiking is not so, leading some peopleto save on winter sports during recessions in favour of longer summer holi-days. It also to some extent corroborates the Whistler story. Today a daytrip to Whistler for skiing costs close to $200, which would cover the cost ofa very long weekend of hiking and camping. Flying to remote places wherethe snow is better is possible (albeit for a different segment of the popula-tion) with low-cost airlines and also people seriously engaged in skiing andsnowboarding able to travel to remote places to practise even during sum-mer, following the snow so to speak. All of these economic aspects could131.3. Potential causal factors for the shiftbe partly responsible for the recent trend towards the shift in activity butcould also explain some of the older moves towards year-round tourism.In addition, the number of pensioners is increasing and this segment ofthe population is typically less attracted by snow activities but still attractedby the mountain/nature environment. Some being less physically “fit”, theseindividuals are tending to use the available infrastructure to gain access tohigher elevations. As Needham, Wood, and Rollins [2004b] state: “Thisexpansion to summer use has occurred because it enables operators to [...]provide access for people who may not otherwise be able to experience alpinesettings.” Scott, McBoyle, and Minogue [2007, p. 188] also refer to theageing population:“[b]ecause of industry trends and demographic projections (age-ing, increased ethnic diversity) in Canada, the Canadian SkiCouncil estimates that Quebecs ski market could contract 30%from 6.9 to 4.8 million skier visits. Without strategies to developnew markets and retain existing markets, projected demographicchanges in the skier marketplace would have greater implicationsfor the economic sustainability of the ski industry in Quebecthan climate change over the next 20 years. Importantly, theprojected impacts of demographic and climatic change wouldact synergistically, with both potentially reducing skier visits,to create more challenging business conditions for Quebec skioperators in the 2020s.”This needs to be put into perspective with the findings in the same study thatindicate that ski resorts could stay in business through the use of artificialsnow for at least 20 more years and people tend to be able to keep doingphysical activities well after their retirement with medical and quality of lifeprogress.1.3.4 Are there really causal factors?Vle`s [2012] criticizes the fact that, in France, innovation in ski resort man-agement is more driven by the adaptation to the three major crises: climatechange; economic crisis; and transformation of recreation practices, than bya local political will to manage with vision. This corroborates the majorcauses for a shift to a four-season business as an adaptation practice forski resorts. Interestingly, in this article based on the French Pyre´ne´es, Vle`sproposes an very pertinent dichotomy for ski resorts: on one side the ski141.3. Potential causal factors for the shiftresort ex-nihilo, i.e. which was created at a suitable location from scratch;on the other side the village-resort, i.e. a traditional mountain village whichat some point embraced the skiing industry and capitalized on the proxim-ity (and presumably quality) of slopes. The four-season shift is potentiallysomething more difficult to do for the former category because of the ex-clusivity of the business whereas a village-resort most probably possessesa more diverse economy and can already be intrinsically four-season usingcraftsmanship, heritage, and identity as a tourism asset in the summer. Hefurther reports that 2006 was a particularly bad year in term of snow coverin the French Catalan country and many communities suffered financially.He asserts that the situation is not going to get better and asks whetherthe solution lies in modernisation of the facilities (ski-lifts are described asobsolete, but he also mentions the need to bring more snow-cannons) or inthe shift towards a four-season tourism. The latter assertion make me thinkthat the observed shift from winter-only to year-round has not happenedyet for his case studies. His research examines the implications of a changeof governance via a grouping of communities under a specific French lawbut argues that this grouping is necessary for “a production of richness anddiversification of sites and events.”In conclusion, almost all the literature presents the four-season businesschange as an adaptation to global warming, deemed responsible for the eco-nomic difficulties facing ski resorts. My theory is that it is not only anadaptation strategy but also the result of an (almost Darwinian) evolution:resorts failing to adapt may not be in business very long. Most probablythe next generation (or more, further down the road) of mountain resortswill all be four-season resorts. Consolidating diversification constitutes oneimportant mode of resilience. This evolution comes as an adaptation to ex-ternal stresses (i.e. economic difficulties, with climate change and the loss ofsnow cover as a prime factor), but also comes from a more subtle change inusers practices and possibly a mixture of age and wealth pairing. Dependingon the case, a change to other businesses in the same area (such as movingaway from resource extraction, etc.) could be also playing a role, but this ispure conjecture and very location-dependent.Identifying the actual causes of the shift is very difficult. It seems thatthere is some sort of an self-reflexive effect as the shift induces a change inthe behaviour of the visitors who thereafter induces an incentive to go morein the direction of year-round business. It is very difficult to know which151.3. Potential causal factors for the shiftcame first5. It could have been an unconscious trend to get over the issueof seasonality that has been gathering importance recently in the light ofclimate change, especially for snow-based activities as clearly stated in thetitle of the paper “The Canary in the Coalmine” [Bicknell and Mcmanus,2006].5Another metaphor could be the famous chicken and egg one. However, I derive plea-sure from obscure references so I prefer the Ouroboros one, an ancient symbol of a dragonor a serpent eating its own tail.16Chapter 2Case studies and socialscience methods“A final word about interdisciplinary work: do not underestimate its dif-ficulties. The more specialties we try to stitch together, the greater areour opportunities to make mistakesand the more numerous are our willingcritics.” [Hardin, 1998]2.1 Towards qualitative researchThere are a number of scientific concepts that could be used for this research.Of particular relevance is the concept of resilience within the socio-ecologicalsystem constituted by the zone around the ski resort. Clifton [2010] pro-poses the following resilience-based framework for ecosystems’ evaluation:Adaptability/ adaptive-capacity, Diversity, Exposure, Integrity, Modularity,Rate of change, Redundancy, Sensitivity, Spare capacity, Thresholds, andVulnerability. Amongst these aspects of resilience the most important forthis project is Diversity (not only ecological but also social and economic)as for instance stated by Henry F. Diaz and Connie I. Millar [2008, p. 8]:“Increasing diversity in ecological habitat, forest plantations, ri-parian ecosystems, watershed conditions, or rural community ca-pacities (extending from ski-resort to four-season resort) may bea prudent strategy. An opportune time to promote diversity isduring post-disturbance management.”I am a strong believer that the major issue in sustainability, global climatechange adaptation, etc. is in the numbers and that it is, therefore, criticalthat scale effects are studied. For instance, one can read about very pub-licized towns in Sweden that are sustainable energy-wise, stepping outsideof fossil fuel thanks to the use of surrounding forests. However, these cities(namely Va¨xjo¨ and Bor˚as [Douard, 2012a,b]) are fairly small, under 100,000inhabitants and with large forested areas available. The same would not172.1. Towards qualitative researchbe viable in different conditions. This is addressed in the present researchby taking on at least two case-study resorts of significantly different sizes,including a corporate and a family-based business.The concept of Limits of Acceptable Change (as a framework, from Man-ning, Lime, and Hof [1996]) is key to this research as it is tied to the carryingcapacity of an area and is clearly both ecologically and from a social per-spective, i.e. the recreationist’s perception, therefore influencing tourismbusinesses. It also includes the important idea of monitoring. However, itneeds to be compared with resource extraction (such as logging) when con-sidering the shift, as a shift is “from something to something.” The issueof crowding in alpine ski zones during summer has been for instance ad-dressed/measured by Needham, Rollins, and Wood [2004a] in the Whistlerarea and could be a good source for the starting point of the part concerningnew extreme sports/recreations in this research. The same authors tried toaddress the reasons and behaviour of such people in another article in re-lation to their choices and environmental perception [Needham, Wood, andRollins, 2004b]. Therefore, not only the notions of visuals and aesthetics butalso the relationship between the forest industry and the tourism industrywill be addressed.The study by Forsyth [1998] of the factors leading Himalayan farmers todestroy their mountain ecosystem through agricultural practices highlightsthe concern about the common bias of tuning a study in order to prove aparticular idea. It seems that the use of reflexivity, in the sense of Bourdieu[1992] and Camic, Bourdieu, and Wacquant [1993] during the investigationcould prevent a detrimental bias. I am fully aware that I would very muchlike this research to show that (at least a large portion of) the trees arebetter left standing than cut down as timber, and that by performing theshift we will save the forests of the world. In collecting and sorting data,analysing and drawing conclusions, I will try to keep this in mind and stayas objective as possible.Bruno Latour debated in his two books (the first one “We have neverbeen modern” [Latour, 1992] setting the basis for the second one,) that theneed for real “Politics of Nature” [Latour, 1999] is dire. Politics of Natureare described as a mix between Nature, science and politics, leading to publicwelfare, therefore a need for public involvement (which is only one way ofobtaining so). Some researchers from the Faculty of Geography at UBC havetried to use Latour’s paradigm to analyse environmentally-oriented issues182.2. Methods of investigationsuch as the Great Bear Rainforest political struggle, analysed by Dempsey[2011] and clearly showing the importance of including society in the debate.As was expressed by one of the interview participants when describing theissues faced by the Cheakamus Community Forest in Whistler, one can bringas much science to the table as one wants, but dealing with the harvestingold trees is a very emotional matter that needs to be understood and takeninto account:“And that is where I think the community forest is at a dis-advantage because it comes back with all the scientific logicalarguments but we are dealing with emotions, you are cutting old-growth trees, that is bad. It doesn’t go beyond that.” [Whistler]So it is clear that forest management and change in business in tourism is avery “human” thing and the core of this research has been done with qual-itative research methods, trying to understand, as wikipedia6 puts it (oftena concise summary, if not entirely reliable): “the why and how of decisionmaking, not just what, where, when. Hence, smaller but focused samplesare more often needed rather than large random samples.”Qualitative research comprises data collection, data reduction, and dis-play and drawing of conclusions. In the following sections, I will detail howthe data were selected, explaining the choice of case studies and sample sizeand choice of stakeholder groups as well as how the interview question se-quence/progression was designed. Then the qualitative data analysis (QDA)methods and tools will be detailed to show how the data have been gatheredand analyzed in order to answer the research questions.2.2 Methods of investigation2.2.1 The need for case studiesThis project is addressed as a multiple-case study [Yin, 2009]. The researchwas conducted with different scale communities (corporate, family-based)in order to answer the research questions based on location/geography andabove all trying to get a sense of potential scale effects. The selected casestudies were four resorts in British-Columbia, Canada, namely:− Whistler,6http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualitative research (accessed March 2014)192.2. Methods of investigation− Hemlock Valley resort,− Sun Peaks,− Mount Washington resort.Whistler has been selected because it represents a large and corporateresort with a long and documented history. The studied business shift hasbeen witnessed long ago but no consensus has been found in the literature ona particular date, if it is even possible to identify such a date. The history ofthe resort has been described; Gill and Williams [2011] focus on the gover-nance shift from growth machine to growth management, whereas Sarembaand Gill [1991] focus on the conflict around access/use of the higher parts ofthe Garibaldi Park which ensued from the business shift. These two issuesare related to the proposed research and provided a basis for understandinga part of the history of the resort.Hemlock Valley (now Hemlock Resort) represents the counterpart toWhistler in the sense that it is a small, family-oriented resort that seems tobe operating as a winter-only resort. Therefore the aim of this particularcase study was to investigate the potential benefits of a shift to a four seasonbusiness, or at least summer operations. There is no documentation aboutthe resort in the peer-reviewed literature.The scale of Sun Peaks lies between Whistler and Hemlock, and alsopresents a different climate as it is located in the interior of British Columbia.The current mayor of Sun Peaks was heavily involved in the history of theWhistler and therefore Sun Peaks can be seen as an experiment that is draw-ing on the experience of its bigger sister7. The website of the resort indicatesthat it describes itself as a year-round mountain resort, albeit smaller in sizethan Whistler.Mount Washington resort is also a small resort that currently has a win-ter and summer tourism plan but has recently closed its summer operationto mountain bikers. Mountain biking, from the literature and personal expe-rience, seemed to be a major asset and economic driver for summer businessand therefore the case study looked interesting. The resort is in a state offlux, and is currently on the market. Moreover, Mount Washington resortpresents a fascinating opportunity as it is sandwiched between Strathcona7assuming resorts are of the feminine gender, they are in French: “une station de sportd’hiver”202.2. Methods of investigationregional park and private land owned by TimberWest. The land occupiedby the resort is also private, and not leased by the government as is the casefor the other three resorts in the study. For this case study, as in HemlockValley, the focus of my study was on trying to understand the factors pre-venting a successful full shift.It would have been interesting to have had more case studies: there areabout 70 ski areas in BC (from a 2005 report, from the BC Stats website8),all with different economic diversity and weighting, and specific ecologicalconditions. Of course, the Alps are a very rich research area and there isa profusion of journal articles dealing with the ski industry in relation toclimate change in Europe (as been seen in chapter 1.3.1) and I have beenin contact with a Ph.D. student from Grenoble University (France) study-ing the winter to year-round shift in medium altitude ski resorts in France(“stations de moyenne montagne”, meaning below the tree line, in the Vos-ges mountains and around Grenoble). To the best of my knowledge, we arethe only two people specifically researching the effects of this shift on skiresorts, although we are looking at the shift from very different perspectives.She is more interested in the relationship with national and local govern-ments, as shown by Achin and George-Marcelpoil [2013].2.2.2 Qualitative research tools - reflections about samplingThe main tool used in this research was one-on-one semi-structured inter-views of selected community stakeholders or key informants, followed by amix of qualitative data analysis inspired by the grounded theory method,and content analysis of the interviews. Each interview comprised sevenquestions directed at addressing both technical questions about forest man-agement/planning and ecology, and long-time effects on the welfare of thecommunity.Semi-structured interviews (as described by Rubin and Rubin [1995] andSnyder [1996]) can be used to evaluate the opinion of different categories ofa population such as small business’ owners and community residents and todevelop an understanding of their opinion about the welfare of their commu-nities. However, as some of the information that is sought after is specialized8http://bcstats.gov.bc.ca/Files/86f97f4a-ca97-44b8-83ca-7081b1fa8a04/InfolineSkiinginWhistler.pdf accessed in March 2014212.2. Methods of investigationand technical, sampling was not random and interviews with selected indi-viduals directly involved in the community planning were also required. Forexample, the chairman of the Cheakamus Community Forest (CCF), theforest engineer in charge of the harvesting for the CCF, the recreation plan-ner for the Resort Municipality of Whistler (RMOW) and the editorialistof Pique (one of Whistler’s newspapers) were selected in Whistler, the firstcase study. Pre-studies (or feasibility studies) were conducted in two of thecase studies (Whistler and Hemlock Valley) in order to start understandingthe systems/communities and also to help identifying important stakeholdergroups. These were completed during preliminary contacts while scoping theproject. The gathering of this type of information is one of the characteris-tics of stakeholders put forward in Jamal and Getz [1995].The choice of the group and individual interviewees can be related tothe question of who is a suitable stakeholder for collaborative action incommunity tourism planning, as analysed by Jamal and Getz [1995, p.198].According to them, the key stakeholder groups are as follow:“(1.) local government plus other public organizations havinga direct bearing on resource allocation; (2.) tourism industryassociations and sectors such as Chamber of Commerce, Con-vention and Visitor Bureau and regional tourist authority; (3.)resident organizations (community groups); (4.) social agency(e.g. school boards, hospitals); (5.) special interest groups.”For this study, the following groups were selected as of interest:• forest professionals active in the system,• small business owners in the field of outdoor recreation such as sportsgear shops and commercial recreation companies’ owners (possiblymore impacted by the business shift than other businesses),• governance bodies (mayor office, city planners, recreation manager,member of the chamber of commerce),• lift/slope managers and operators,• real estate and accommodation professionals,• interests groups (for instance environmentalists would represent a viewfrom one extreme of the spectrum of opinions).222.2. Methods of investigationAnother classification can be made in terms of permanent residents,second-home owners, seasonal workers and tourists in the case of resorts.In this research pemanent residents were chosen because of the aforemen-tioned categories of interest. Moreover, “normal” (i.e. permanent but notparticularly involved in the aforementioned categories) residents are the coreof the communities and their voice is important if elusive, as shown in thehistory of Whistler described by Gill and Williams [2011]. All participantswere selected for their long time residency or involvement in the communi-ties and this appears clearly in the interviews.I did sample the opinions of seasonal workers and tourists as I consideredthat they would have little to no information about forest management andcommunity planning. Besides, I was able to draw on my own experienceas a visitor in the communities, as well as gathering information throughinformal discussions with acquaintances. For example, almost everyone Iknow in Vancouver has been to Whistler and has an opinion about it9.Second-home owners are also missing from the sampling, which is moreof an issue. In BC, they hold municipal voting rights in the communitieswhere their property is located. Their opinion can be important in the sensethat they would probably be driven by a different interests than residents,for instance the construction of a community hall or a public library can beof a limited interest to a person using his house for three weeks during Xmasholidays. Besides, as one of the interviewee in Whistler pointed out, theycan be “perfect NIMBIES10”. This would be critical depending on the ratioof second-home owners to permanent residents. In Whistler, for instance,Gill [2000] states that: “[al]though a few second-home owners are active incommunity affairs, most are not, and few exercise their option to vote inlocal elections.” In Hemlock Valley this issue is of a more central concern,as can be seen for one of the interviewees (see chapter 5.1.3). However, forpractical reasons, it was difficult to access this stakeholder group, as theywere largely absent at the time of the fieldwork. Even in winter, it would bedifficult as many rent out their homes, only occupying it for a short periodduring the skiing season.I also consciously avoided First Nations’ territorial issues and do not9Pretty much like everybody would undoubtedly fare better than the coach, or theplayers, while sitting in a sofa watching a sport event on TV.10i.e. adherents of the Not In My Back Yard (NIMBY) philosophy, I am a bit insecureabout the correct pluralisation NIMBies, NIMBIES or NIMBYs...232.2. Methods of investigationhave any representatives of any First Nations in the sample, which wouldin any case have been difficult because of the problems associated with hi-erarchy. My understanding of the First Nations’ issue in North America, ingeneral, and in British Columbia, in particular, would not allow me to givetheir views adequate consideration, and I could not defend viewing themas “just as another stakeholder”. Some information about the impact oftreaties or partnerships were addressed by some of the respondents and arereported in chapter 5.Table 2.1: Interview participants grouped by case studiesGroups Whistler Hemlock Val. Mnt Wash. Sun PeaksForest professionals 3 2 0 0Small businesses 4 2 n/a 3Municipality 7 n/a n/a 2Other government 0 0 2 0Resort/lift company 1 1 1 1Real estate 2 2 n/a 1Interest groups 4 0 0 0Table 2.1 presents a detailed description of the type of people interviewedin each resort, grouped by interests. The sampling is clearly biased. Almostall participants lived in the resorts therefore they were part of the community(which is a characteristic that was sought after) and arguably they were therefor a reason, namely the lifestyle associated with living in a ski/mountainresort. This is further shown by almost 100% of the sample declaring somekind of outdoor activity as their primary form of recreation. One intervieweeeven commented on it:“I think you’d struggle to find an indoor person in this town.”[Whistler]So I am aware that their vision about environmental issues and qualityof life may have been influenced by this. Stilgoe [2001] argues that manyNorthern Americans nowadays have a disinclination towards having closecontact with nature, yet the vast majority of my sample declared outdooractivities as their main recreational activity, further indicating the potentialbias. Perception is very dependent on individuals, as stated by Corenetal etal. (1998) in chapter 18 “Individual differences” of their book, but a counter242.2. Methods of investigationargument is that studies have found that the notion of scenic beauty is quiteindependent of sex, age, culture, activities, etc. Indeed, loggers would ratethe beauty of a given landscape almost exactly the same as conservationistswould [Daniel, 1990]. However, it seems that the research supports the over-emphasis that has been given tolandscape visual evaluation, as is addressedby Kimmins [1999] in his (nicely titled) paper “Beauty and the ‘Beast’”.The gender distribution is very much skewed towards male interviewees.This study does not focus on gender difference in perceptions (as for examplein the article by Tindall, Davies, and Mauboules [2003]) so participants’ rolesin the communities were considered more important.2.2.3 Participant observation as a way to gatherinformationIn order to find key informants and to understand the dynamics of the com-munities, I tried to spend a significant amount of time in each location. Itis important to be able to build a representative sample base and to havebetter contact with the participants. In the cases of Whistler and HemlockValley, two (or more) trips and stays were necessary. At Whistler, I alsoattended several meetings of the Cheakamus Community Forest, includingan open-house that was extremely interesting because it propelled me into amunicipal campaign that resulted in the eviction of the entire council. Thiswas interesting because the community forest and the interaction betweenlogging (of old-growth forest in that particular case) and tourism played acentral role in the dynamics of that election. At Sun Peaks, given the dis-tance from Vancouver, I could only manage one stay but as it was the lastcommunity that I sampled and I was able to construct the sample base andconduct the interviews more efficiently.I also used different kinds of documents to become acquainted with allof the case studies: the history of the communities development, officialcommunity plans (OCPs), government Land Use Plans and local LUP in-dicators/criteria, newspaper articles, community archives, etc. in order tobuild historical and geographical knowledge over time of the studied areasand tracking their changes in time. It also helps to show knowledge aboutthe communities history while interacting with interview participants.252.2. Methods of investigation2.2.4 Coming up with the interview questionsAll interviews started with very generic questions about the participant andhis/her vision of the resort. These questions were meant to “break the ice”and give me an understanding of the person I was dealing with while at thesame time gathering background information about the resort, its historyand its context. After these preliminary questions, each question was aimedat a particular research question or hypothesis and follow-up questions wereused when the topic I was investigating did not ocur naturally in the con-versation. A difficulty was that some people were much more articulatethan others and some people were very prone to digressing or drifting intotangential topics. However, bringing them back to the questions bore therisk of influencing their answers. Similarly, I refrained as much as possiblefrom voicing my opinion but was sometimes asked for it. All interviews wererecorded, then later transcribed and coded. Following standard protocol allinterviews were confidential and audio files stored on encrypted and pass-word protected computer systems. The transcripts were kept as anonymousas possible, using numbers instead of participants’ names.In the case of a resort with a successful (or at least accomplished) shiftthe questions were aimed at understanding the effect of the shift on forestmanagement and on the socio-economic welfare of the community whereasin the case of a community still primarily snow-based the questions wereaimed at assessing the potential of the shift for the community and theconsequences for forest management in the area.Table 2.2: Interview questions with follow-ups and aim.# Question and follow-up(s) Aim1 how long have you been living or in-volved with the community? Whatis your profession and what is yourmain recreational activity?Introduction of the partic-ipant: occupation (workand recreation), durationof the stay in the commu-nity, etc.2 Could you describe the tourism ac-tivities in your town/resort?Follow-up: do you consider the re-sort a year-round resort?Finding out if the com-munity is a winter onlyor year-round business, ortwo seasons with shoulderseasons.Continued on next page262.2. Methods of investigationTable 2.2 – continued from previous page# Question and follow-up(s) Aim3 Did you witness the shift? Whendid it occur and what was the timeframe, was it gradual? What doyou thing were the causal factor?Follow-up #1: Do you think thatthe behaviour patterns of recreation-ists and tourists have changed andthat it impacted the shift?Follow-up #2: Was there a connec-tion with real estate?When did the communityconsidered itself an all-year-round mountain re-sort? What were thecausal factors for the shift?If the shift happened, find-ing when and why it did4 What role did the shift play inrelation with the institutions, e.g.with Whistler becoming part ofthe RMI? Did it have implicationswith governance at a high level,for instance the establishment of acommunity forest?Follow-up: In Whistler, did theestablishment of the CCF influ-enced the amount of stakeholderengagement?Investigating the relation-ship between the shift andthe institutions: effectof the Resort municipal-ity Initiative (RMI), largecorporation management,community forestry, rela-tions with provincial gov-ernment, etc.5 What effect did the shift have oncommunity welfare in terms of em-ployment, quality of life, etc.?Looking if the shift wasbeneficial for the commu-nity welfare - new businesscreations, effect on employ-ment, infrastructure, qual-ity of life, etc.Continued on next page272.2. Methods of investigationTable 2.2 – continued from previous page# Question and follow-up(s) Aim6 Do you think that the boundariesof the “system” (i.e. the resort in-fluence zone over the forested area)have expanded following the shift?Can you describe the effect that ithad on the forest management prac-tices? Do you think it influencedthe community engagement in theforest management? Follow-up #1:Current values: resource extraction,recreation, others?Follow-up #2: Are there monitor-ing practices in place? - Follow-up#3: What is your opinion on theforest service road’s management?Investigation relationshipsbetween the shift andforest management, howis the forest managedcurrently/in the past? Ex-traction based, recreationbased? And was there achange due to the shift?Is there an EBM plan usedfor the forest manage-ment?Is there monitoring ofthe multi-values forestmanagement and how is itdone?Relationship betweenthe shift and the systemboundaries: was therea change in the systemboundaries, larger systemto manage, greater amountof values/stakeholders totake into account?7 These are conclusion questions. Doyou consider that the shift influ-enced “in a good way” the socio-economic equity/balance of the re-sort? Do you think that more stake-holders have been included in theeconomy of the resort following theshift?Understanding whetherthe shift was positive fromthe ecological and welfareof the community point ofviews?Table 2.2 shows the questions that participants were asked, togetherwith follow-up questions, and a short justification for the question. Thesequestions were used for interviews in Whistler and Sun Peaks. For Mount282.2. Methods of investigationWashington and Hemlock Valley resorts I modified the phrasing in orderto better reflect their particular situation. Then some demographics weregathered: birth year and nationality. This did not prove very useful sincethe vast majority of respondents were Canadian citizens.I avoided directly mentioning climate change in all the questions fortwo reasons: as stated in the introduction (chapter 1.1) climate changeadaptation was not the main topic of the study, and I wanted to see ifparticipants would mention it. I discuss this further in chapter After sampling - Tools for qualitative data analysisThe workflow used in this project involved three steps (that are detailedbelow):1. Each interview gave direct answers to some of the research questionsby the way the interview questions were phrased. When analysing thetranscript a table was constructed with this information. I call thisthe top-down approach11.2. Each transcript was analysed using a method inspired by groundedtheory that allowed themes emerge via coding. Multiple passes werenecessary to bring the number of keywords and themes to a level wherea theory could be constructed. I call this the bottom-up approach.3. I then tried to see how the emerging themes from the bottom-up ap-proach mapped the answers from the top-down approach, which hope-fully helped me gather evidence and understanding of how participantsrelated to the hypothesis and questions at various level of granularity.The top-down approach: the birthing of answersSome questions were posed in such a way as to give almost direct answersto the research questions. So what I call the top-down approach consistedof basically counting answers. It provided a basis for understanding thesystems and started building the foundations of the narrative of the thesis.The data obtained is shown in chapter 4.1.11This term and the other one (bottom-up) are from mechanical engineering and mi-croelectronics design methods, relics of my past...292.2. Methods of investigationThe bottom-up approach: emergence of themesThe bottom-up approach was performed to try to gain an abstraction of theresearch questions and hypothesis. Each interview transcript was read andwhen a sentence or a group of sentences or a phrase was considered to be akey quote for a particular theme it was coded as such. It was of particularimportance to avoid trying to answer the research questions or hypothesesat this stage. One of the goals was to let concepts and connections emerge.As an example, the sentence group: “I know that the IRCP recognizesMount Washington as a year-round resort, they want to see us go in thatdirection. So they are putting together initiatives to assist in that pro-cess.” was coded with the keywords government and incentive. Codes orkeywords are representative textual descriptions that are assigned to the se-lected clauses. They were further set as linked. This was done using open-and axial-coding strategies inspired by the grounded theory method [Straussand Corbin, 1994].After all interviews from one case study had been coded, a pass with a“home-modified” version of LATEXand the ulqda package12 provided a tablewith all the codes and the numbers of occurrences, and a code/keywordcloud (which is just another way to visualize it, but the words are not or-dered in the same manner and it helps to group codes. The first pass usuallyproduced many redundant keywords that needed to be grouped, refined,combined, etc. This then led to the emergence of themes and ultimatelythey became the basis of a generic answer to a part of the research question.Some themes emerged because they appeared to be a common concernfor a large number of interviewees but some emerged because some individ-ual made it appear. It could be because said-individual thought about ita lot himself or because he was part of a social group (professional or not)with more understanding and distance over the studied shift. The themesare really emerging directly from the data by occurences or by lack thereof:if a keyword appears 50 times and is linked to many other keywords it hasa tendency to be important but if two keywords are linked to each othersbut left alone in a corner of the graphs they can express an interesting rad-ical/different point of view.The question on how and when to decide when a pattern was worth iden-12Annex ?? explains how to use LATEXand the ulqda package to perform the QDA.302.2. Methods of investigationtifying as a code, when to group and when to link was interesting. Given thefocus on repeatability and the scientific method, I should state how I cameup with these keywords and links. There is a great deal of subjectivity inthe process as I was the one creating the research question(s) and hypothe-ses, the interview questions and then coding/treating the data. The hardestpart was not to be influenced by pre-conceptions or by what I wanted toshow (as explained earlier in this chapter). However, I believe that any-body with a reasonable amount of knowledge about the case studies wouldhave obtained similar results. The links were based on inductive and deduc-tive analysis/thinking of the keywords in relation to the systems and to theclauses that were coded. Most of the links were created subsequent to thefirst coding phase, during which keywords were generated freely without anylinks. They were meant to help me understand causalities or correlationsin relation to the studied phenomenon (i.e. the shift). Therefore shift is akeyword I consciously removed from the final coding refinement pass.In the clause used above as an example of the link between the keywordsgovernment and incentive, I was motivated in this direction because one ofthe research subquestions dealt with trying to understand how goverments(local, regional, provincial) interact to facilitate or prevent the shift fromhappening. It was also motivated by other clauses in other interviews withsimilar concepts. Of course it also indicates that what was expressed wasindeed an incentive from the government.Mapping top-down and bottom-up approachesIn chapter 5, the research questions are answered using the results fromboth top-down and bottom-up approaches as a basis. The top-down ap-proach provided a high level answer, e.g. whether people think that theshift was responsible for a change in forest management practices or not; atwhat time did the shift occur (for case studies where it did). The bottom-up approach provided a subtler and finer analysis basis to understand theramifications and linkages between notions in relation to the questions. Iused printed versions of the graphs in addition to electronic versions in orderto be able to zoom in and follow links. The emerged themes were used tocreate the organisation/outline of chapter 5.In chapter 5, I present the findings in four sections/categories. Theseemerged while comparing case studies, grouping emerging themes and link-ing them to the research questions and hypotheses. For instance, a lot of312.2. Methods of investigationinformation was gathered about the necessary factors for a successful shift(or what could prevent it) and I feel it is relevant to start with it. Chapter5.1 therefore begins the findings/answers sections in relation to hypothesis3 and provides a layer of understanding necessary to put into perspectivethe following sections about forest management and environmental impacts.Ending chapter 5 with the section on the quality of life in the resorts tiesthe story together and links it back to the residents and the human factorand the necessity for qualitative methods.This method and workflow give easy access to interesting and pertinentquotes. The software package generates a database that can be search us-ing the keywords. Then, each of the concepts and questions are answeredand exemplified using these quotes from the participants. To preserve con-fidentiality only quotes that do not permit identification of the respondenthave been chosen. In the rare cases when identification was unavoidable,the participants authorisation was obtained, following the rules of the UBCOffice of Research Ethics. Each quote is followed by, italicized and in squarebrackets, the attached case study.32Chapter 3Case studies - geographicaldescription of the fourresorts3.1 Preliminary remarksThe four selected case studies are located on the map figure 3.1. Theypresent different geographies and different proximities to large urban nodes.Whistler and Hemlock Valley are close to the lower mainland, with Whistlerbeing a prime destination for the Vancouver (and Seattle, WA) market andHemlock Valley targeting more Chilliwak, Abbotsford and Mission. MountWashington is primarily used by Vancouver Island customers due to the ne-cessity to take a ferry to get there from the main land. Sun Peaks is close toKamloops, too far to really drain a lot of people regularly from Vancouver13.An important notion that is used in some of the figures given later inthis chapter is the one of Skier Carrying Capacity (SCC):“The determination of an area’s Skier Carrying Capacity (SCC)is perhaps the most critical step in snow resort area planning. Of-ten referred to as the ’Comfortable Carrying Capacity’ or ’SkiersAt One Time’, this figure represents the number of skiers andsnowboarders that can be safely supported by an area’s lift andtrail system, while providing a quality experience to each abilitylevel. Skier Carrying Capacity is determined via the integrationof lift capacity, operating hours, acceptable slope densities, slopegradients, skill classifications and vertical metres of lift servicedterrain.” [Ecosign Mountain Resort Planners Ltd, 2006, p. II-25]13That may be a European comment, distances are relative and based on upbringing.Nobody from France would drive 8 hours to spend a weekend somewhere, that wouldmean more or less crossing the entire country.333.1. Preliminary remarksThis concepts ties in with the notion of carrying capacity, from a strictlyeconomical and operational point of view. It is a good indicator of the sizeof a resort.In this chapter, I will briefly introduce each of the four case studies,focusing on historical events in relation to the shift or to forest management.The case studies are ordered in chronological order of my sampling them:Whistler, Hemlock Valley, Mount Washington and Sun Peaks. I will endthis chapter by a brief comparison of all resorts in terms of size, history, andnumber of respondents.343.1.PreliminaryremarksFigure 3.1: The locations of the four case studies (Google Maps screenshot)353.2. Whistler3.2 WhistlerThe town started on the native trade route from Lil’wat to the coast andpassed through the Rainbow Lodge and PGE era from 1915 to the mid-1950s (a complex of fishing lodges close by rail access) until the GaribaldiLifts Company opened skiing at Creekside in 1965. The fact that the resortwas, quite ironically, originally a summer resort was often mentioned by re-spondents. The winter side of the resort was initially planned following abid to obtain the 1968 Winter Olympics, which was unsuccessful. Whistlerand Blackcomb were originally two separate companies, operating on themountains of the same name; they merged in 1997 when Intrawest, thenoperating Blackcomb, purchased Whistler Mountain Ski Corporation. Thecurrent status is that Whistler Blackcomb Holdings is the manager and con-trols 75% of the partnerships that own the assets of Whistler-Blackcomb(25% are owned by Nippon Cable, the same company owning Sun Peaks).Whistler mountain peaks at 2,182 m and proposes a 1,503 m vertical dropwhereas Blackcomb mountain peaks at 2,436 m and proposes a 1,565 m ver-tical drop. The cumulated ski area (groomed) is 3,307 ha (with 1,925 hafor Whistler and 1,382 ha for Blackcomb) and 200+ ski runs for all levels ofvisitors. The lift capacity is: 65,507 skier/hour, I have been unable to finda recent SCC number, only that “[t]he new Harmony 6 high-speed chairliftwill be capable of transporting six people on each chair and will increasethe uphill skier capacity by 50 per cent; going from 2,400 skiers per hour to3,600.14” in the recent news from the company. It is not, however, the exactSCC. It still gives an idea of the size of the resort. During summer, themountain bike park provides a 1,100 m vertical drop (for intermediary- toadvanced-level downhill mountain bikers) with chairlift access, and around50 trails for more than 250 km.Some key elements of Whistler’s rich history in relation to the topic ofthis research will be proposed, mainly milestones for municipality resort is-sues and forest management. The establishment of the municipality datesfrom 1975 and the village was designed with its key features in 1978. TheBlackcomb Mountain development was initiated in 1979 and was followedby an extension of Whistler Mountain into the village15.14http://www.whistlerblackcomb.com/about-us/news-releases/sept-4-2013.aspx (ac-cessed March 2014)15I recommand the website of the Whistler museum as an excellent source of information,as is the museum itself, for the history of the resort.363.2. WhistlerTable 3.1: Excerpt from the history of the “Three C’s” (Cooperation-Coordination-Confrontation, from 1980 to 2001, source Mr. Don McLauren.Date Action1980 Cheakamus River Whistler Corridor Plan1984 Attempt to share management with BCFS (rejected)1985 Forest Landscape Plan1986 Attempt at modified Tree Farm Licence (rejected)1987 Whistler LRUP created (still in use)1988 Timber Licence trade made on the flank of Whistler1990 Interpretive Forest conceptual plan1990 Soo TSA Options Report, RMOW position1991 First LRUP recreation assessment1991 Sea-to-Sky LRUP created1992 Whistler Resort Recreation Area proposed (RMOW)1992 Forestry Recreation Workshop (RMOW/MOF)1994 Protected Area Strategy, RMOW Area of interest notincluded, subsequent Mayor’s Option rejected1994 Soo TSA Forest Management Strategy (MOF)1994 Resource Emphasis Zone, public and commercialrecreation1995 LRUP Forest Recreation Plan (RMOW+MOF)1996 Sea-to-Sky Commercial Backcountry Rec. Study(BCAL)1996 Soo TSA Recreation Management Strategy + Analy-sis (MOF)1997 Whistler Region Forest Development Plan (RMOW toFRBC)1998 Sea-to-Sky Corridor Forest Sector Strategic Plan(RMOW+FRBC)1998 Whistler Community Forest Proposal (rejected)1999 Commercial Recreation Study, Planning Team(BCAL)2000 Carrying Capacity Pilot: 16 Mile Creek (BCAL +Agencies)2000 Public Recreation Study, Squamish Forest District2001 Land Resource Management Plan (initiated)373.2. WhistlerTable 3.1, courtesy of Mr Don McLauren, shows the close ties that linkthe development of Whistler, the forest industry and governance. It showshow Whistler played an important role in advancing the recognition of recre-ation as a value to be accounted for in forest management, at a governmentlevel.Whistler is a very good candidate to look at the business shift. In-deed, it is accepted as a four-season destination resort. Located about 120km north of Vancouver, it hosts about two million visitors annually withapproximately 45% of the visits occurring during the shorter winter season(figures provided by the Resort Municipality of Whistler in 2004). Gill [2000]identified the shift to year-round tourism in 1982 with the construction ofa golf course in the Official Community Plan (OCP). It is interesting to seethat it corresponds to a time of recession in the timeline of the communitydevelopment (Fig.3.2). Golfing capitalizes on accommodation possibilitiesand possibly the driver was to use the otherwise empty housing during non-snow season. In 1996, the number of summer visitors exceeded the numberof winter visitors for the first time [Hudson, 2012], but the economic valuestill was higher in winter as winter visitors stay longer as most come fromfarther away due to Whistlers recognition as a leading international moun-tain destination.Hudson, Ritchie, and Timur [2004, p. 89] noted that Whistler wasamongst “[...] three resorts [...] owned by Intrawest, recognized as themost diversified and successful company in North America, which focuseson developing four-season resorts in conjunction with other partners andinvestors and invests heavily in real estate developments and tourism infras-tructure.” This statement emphasizes the idea that the size of the resortsnot only has an effect on the success of the shift but also that it could berelated to real estate.The Callaghan Valley conundrumThe Callaghan Valley is situated south-east of Whistler. It is part of theCheakamus Community Forest (CCF) and is bordered by some nationalparks (a part of the land, depending on how it is described, is actually insidenational parks.) This area is interesting and typical in the sense that thelist of stakeholders (probably not exhaustive) is fairly long and representsdifferent visions of the land use:1. Timber company (Richmond Plywood, as per mandate of the CCF in383.2. WhistlerFigure 3.2: Whistler development timeline (from Gill [2000], frame emphasismine)this case.)2. Recreation companies (there are several companies but also peopleliving in the Whistler resort...)3. Olympic legacy: at the end of the valley some installations, such as aski-jump facility and cross-country ski tracks, are present due to theuse of the valley for the winter Olympic Games of 2010.4. First Nations: as the land is within the CCF, two First Nations bandsare involved.5. The RMOW6. Wild-life and biodiversity.7. The CCF, if seen as manager of the land, is also a stakeholder.One of the issues attached to the Callaghan Valley is recreational lodg-ing. It is a very good example of complexity and of multiple stakeholder393.2. Whistlerconflicts. The area is heavily used by recreation companies but it is locatedat a significant distance from the municipalities of Whistler or Squamish,making the on-site lodging attractive. Some basic lodging already existsthere and is regularly used by the companies as well as the public. Recre-ation companies would be interested in building more lodging facilities fortheir clients. On the other hand, the Whistler municipality does not wantto lose potential clients. As the land is not under the jurisdiction of theWhistler municipality, they cannot forbid the building of tourist infrastruc-ture. However, the land falls within the CCF, and Whistler Municipality isone of the three members of the CCF. One of the only sources of income forthe CCF is timber, but within the agreements and in an effort to try to mit-igate conflict, harvested areas should not be visible from any location whererecreation companies bring clients. The use of the Olympic legacy is anotherfactor. However, too much lodging opportunity will reduce the “wildernessfeeling factor,” which is also dependent on the presence of old-growth forest.The second growth in the area will not be suitable for harvesting for at leastanother 25 years. This attempt at providing a complete picture about thesituation does not even address the issue of roads and access.The Callaghan Valley is a very good example of the complexity describ-ing its situation. First, the place is biologically complex due to the variety ofland types it encompasses: riparian, alpine, various forest ecosystem types,etc. Secondly, it shows a very high level of complexity due to differences inthe way that different stakeholders view potential land use, and the differentscales: operational and strategic. It is also prone to attract a lot of publicscrutiny due to its proximity to the highly regarded landscapes of Whistlerand Squamish. These landscapes are seen as emblematic of the quality oflife in BC and therefore have a central role to play in improving the way theland is managed, and they can be held up as example of good practice. Allthese issues tie in with the global concept of the shift.To understand the resort better it is necessary to describe the CheakamusCommunity Forest (CCF). Community Forest management was introducedin BC in 1998 with the Community Forest agreement. It consists of a dif-ferent form of tenure on Crown land based not only on timber management(as for the previous legislation), but also allowing members of the commu-nity (i.e. surrounding the piece of land) to manage the rest of the biologicalresources. The size of such pieces of land is fairly small but varies fromhundreds of hectares to more than 60,000 hectares. The Cheakamus Com-munity Forest is one of 50 Community Forests in BC. On the website of the403.3. Hemlock ResortCCF and in their annual reports, the following information can be gained:• the CCF is independent and a not-for-profit organization,• the CCF comprises the 33,067 hectares surrounding Whistler BC,• the CCF was established in April of 2009, a 25-year tenure with theprovincial Ministry of Forests and Range, 3 main partners: ResortMunicipality of Whistler (RMOW), Lil’wat Nation, Squamish Nation,Richmond Plywood is the operations contractor (five-year agreement),• the CCF uses Ecosystem Based Management (EBM) in collaborationwith Ecotrust Canada.The Cheakamus Community Forest is geographically within the area cov-ered by the Sea-to-Sky Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP). TheLRMP document is not really legislation: the plan is intended to guide andinform decision making, but adopting its recommendations is effectively amatter of choice on the part of the relevant agencies and actors. LRMPsare intended to provide “strategic direction for the management of publicresources”, the Sea-to-Sky LRMP is therefore a form of strategic planning,even if the land area is rather small in comparison to the size of the province.The level of granularity could be expanded to provincial and federal legisla-tion but then it would lose its specificity as all regions or sub-regions wouldbe included.During this project I made numerous stays in the community and col-lected 21 audio-recorded interviews.3.3 Hemlock ResortHemlock Resort is a small ski resort located in the Douglas Ranges, locatedclose to Harrison Spring resort and the town of Agassiz.The vertical drop is 396 m from a summit elevation of 1,371 m to a baseelevation of 975 m. The area comprises 121 ha and has 34 runs, the longestof which is 2.3 km. Four lifts can be found on the resort Recreation Con-trolled Area: one triple chair, two double chairs and a beginner rope tow.There are also 13 kilometres of cross-country skiing trails as well as tubingand tobogganing areas.413.4. Mount Washington resortPreviously known as Hemlock Valley Resort, the resort closed due tobankruptcy receivership in 2005. The resort was purchased by BerezanHospitality group and re-opened in December 2006. Shortly thereafter theresort started negotiations with local First Nations and the province of BCfor a substantial expansion that would see the resort become the largestresort facility in the area. The resort proposal includes ski area expansionto 18 lift-serviced areas, 2 golf courses, a marina on Harrison Lake andassociated residential and commercial development. The plan is said tobe in the final stages of approval with a formal agreement expected to beannounced in 2014.3.4 Mount Washington resortFrom the Mount Washington resort’s website:Vision: To be the destination of choice for people seeking extraordinarycoastal mountain experiences.Mission: Our mountain resort provides great alpine experiences in asafe natural environment unique to our island location.Mount Washington was named by Captain Richards as he exploredCanadas Pacific Coast in 1860 as a salute to Rear Admiral John Wash-ington, Official Hydrographer to the Royal Navy. It was the first ski resortplanned in BC. The proposal was put out by two local business men fromCampbell River: Henry Norie and Alex Linton in 1979. Mount Washingtonresort started with two double chairlifts but difficult access. Later on theroad was paved and became the Strathcona Parkway. This had a significanteffect on the resort, as detailed in chapter 5.1.2. In 1995, Mount Wash-ington had more snow than any other ski resort in the world which wassadly not the case this year (2013-2014), when holders of seasonal ski passeswere offered weekend passes for Whistler-Blackcomb. Statistics show thatthe majority of BC visitors come from Vancouver Island, primarily fromthe Victoria area (three-hour drive). Visitors from the Lower Mainland ac-count for about 10% of the visitors. Mount Washington hosts a selectionof events during weekends, winter and summer. For instance. two Interna-tional Paralympic Committee World Cup events were held there. One ofthe main reasons for investigating this resort is that, contrary to the otherthree, the resort company owns the land. Another reason to investigate thiscase study was the proximity to Strathcona Provincial Park, which extendsover 250,000 hectares on central Vancouver Island. Strathcona is the oldest423.4. Mount Washington resortprovincial park in BC (created in 1911) and is also the largest on VancouverIsland.Summer Activities are described as: hiking trails, mini golf, disc golf16,mountain biking, and scenic chair lift rides. Mountain bikers currently have18 trails to choose from (31% beginner, 33% intermediate, 36% expert) ser-viced by 2 lifts; the Hawk Six Pack Express lift and the Eagle Express chair.Hikers can choose from 7 alpine trails on Mount Washington (42% begin-ner, 29% intermediate, 29% expert) serviced by the Eagle Express chairlift17.However, when I was interviewing in the resort the mountain biking activi-ties had been stopped.Figure 3.3: A Vancouver marmot photographed close by the resort ( c©BrynTassell 2009, Many thanks for letting me use the pictures, website:http://www.bryntassell.ca/.)An interesting aspect of Mount Washington is the Tony Barrett Mar-mot Recovery Foundation18, home to 100 marmots and front-line in theVancouver Island marmot rescue program. The Vancouver Island marmot(Marmota vancouverensis) is one of the largest members of the squirrel fam-16golf-like activity played with small frisbees, described at the Professional Disc GolfAssociation http://www.pdga.com/ (accessed April 2014).17From the http://mountwashingtonbc.com/ website, accessed last in March 2014.18http://marmots.org/433.5. Sun Peaks resortily [Team, 2008]. The presence of the marmot on the resort property and thecollaboration between the resort company and the foundation was also oneof the reasons for investigating Mount Washington for this project. Figure3.3 shows one of them. Cute. As stated by a respondent from this casestudy:“I think there was a legitimate environmental concern about theextinction of the marmot and they saw a partner in Mount Wash-ington resort, we donated the land for the park, we’ve done anumber of land donations to enhance projects.” [Mount Wash-ington]3.5 Sun Peaks resortSun Peaks Resort is located in Sun Peaks, BC, 50 km northeast of Kam-loops. The elevations of its mountains range from 2,152 metres at the peakof Mount Tod, to 1,160 metres to the west of the Burfield Base. The totalavailable vertical is approximately 990 metres, with a few individual slopesin the 450 to 750 metre range. Now there are three mountains: Tod (2,152m), Sundance (opened in 1992) and Morrisey (2001). The whole domaincovers 4,139 hectares of Controlled Recreational Area amongst which 1,448hectares are skiable. In 2013 the lift capacity was half of the skier carryingcapacity with respectively 7,720 vertical transport metres per hour for theformer and 14,060 for the latter.A selected (and pertinent to this research) history of Sun Peaks resortsbased on information found on the official website and various magazinesand newspapers can be shown with the following selected dates:• 1961 - The Burfield Lodge and Chairlift opened to the public.• 1990 - Paving of access road from Whitecroft Village to Tod Mountainwas completed.• 1992 - Nippon Cable Company Ltd. of Tokyo, Japan purchased TodMountain. (Figure 3.4 shows the website of Sun Peaks resort, inJapanese.)• 1993 - The lift company name was changed to Sun Peaks Resort Cor-poration.• 1994 - The nine-hole golf course was completed (it would open in 1995.)443.5. Sun Peaks resort• 1999 - Bike carriers were installed on the Sunburst Express chairliftand the Sun Peaks Bike Park opened to the public, providing nearly2,000 feet of lift-accessed vertical.• 2001 - Morrisey platter lift completed and 17 new trails developed onMt. Morrisey, the third mountain to be opened for skiing.• 2005 - The last nine holes of the golf course opens for play completingthe 18-hole golf course, with a length of 6,400 yards (i.e. 5852.2 m); itis the highest elevation course in BC at over 1,200 m above sea level.• 2004 - Sun Peaks Resort Corporation’s Environmental managementsystem is fully certified to ISO 14001:1996 (Certificate #026082), be-coming the first resort in North America to do this. Since then Jack-son Hole and Aspen Snowmass (USA) joined, respectively in 2006 and2004.19• 2010 - Sun Peaks was granted Mountain Resort Municipality Statusby the Province of British Columbia.• 2012 - Sun Peaks Resort celebrates a record-breaking summer in 2012:the largest number of visitors in one summer day, the most summerchairlift passengers in one day, and growth in overnight occupancyeach month through the summer.The forest around is largely composed of lodgepole pines (Pinus contortaDougl. ex Loud. var. latifolia Engelm.) and spruces20). This had a strongeffect on forest management as the resort company resorted to selective log-ging to try to stop an epidemic of the mountain pine beetle and (to a lesserextent) other bark beetles. They also tried experimental forest management:“groomed glading” was started in 2003, a blue run with buffers of trees de-scribed as “buff groomed” for easy visibility and visual quality. They arenot the only ones with this type of management but were allegedly pioneersin doing so.The Sun Peaks master plan is reviewed every three years and shared onthe website of the resort company.19Source: http://sports.espn.go.com/action/snowboarding/news/story?id=6542790which amusingly if not stereotypically misplace Sun Peaks in Alberta.20I have to admit I do not know the exact species...453.5. Sun Peaks resortFigure 3.4: 3 yama, 1 mura, subete no kisetsu, desu ne? Japanese websitefor Sun Peaks resort.46Chapter 4Pure data: resultsThis chapter does not present pure data, but something close to just results.Pure data in the case of this project would be the interview audio files. FirstI show results for the top-down approach and then I show the last graphsof interactions and the clouds of keywords for each resorts. I also give aspecific example of a close-up on some keywords.4.1 Top-down approach resultsIn this section, I organise the answer to direct questions in tables. Table4.1 shows how participants describe their communities in terms of business.I did not propose any category during the interviews, I just asked the par-ticipants to describe their community and, if their answer was not easy tocategorise, I would propose either “ski resort” or “mountain resort” as anincentive.Table 4.1: Description of the resorts’ business typeCase study Year-round (+shoulders) 2 seasons Winter onlyWhistler 16 + 5 2 0Hemlock Valley 0 0 6Mount Washington 0 1 2Sun Peaks 2 + 5 0 0Table 4.2 shows how participants describe the environmental impacts ofthe shift: positive, i.e. no impact in the surrounding areas ; negative, i.e. alot of negative impacts in the surrounding areas; positive with objections,i.e. there are impacts but satisfactory mitigation procedures are in place.Table 4.3 shows participants’ opinion whether the shift changes (or would/shouldchange) the forest management practices in the area and if they agree with474.1. Top-down approach resultsTable 4.2: Environmental impacts’ perception per resortCase study Positive Negative Positive but mitigatedWhistler 11 1 6Hemlock Valley 2 1 1Mount Washington 1 1 1Sun Peaks 1 1 5Percent 39.5% 10.5% 34%the boundaries expansion hypothesis. The total number of answers do notadd up to the amount of interviewees because not everybody clearly putforward an opinion.Table 4.3: Perception of forest management changeCase study Perceived change Expansion No expansionWhistler 12 14 1Hemlock Valley 0 n/a n/aMount Washington 2 0 2Sun Peaks 3 2 2Table 4.4 shows participants’ opinion whether the shift is linked (in anyway) to RMI funding or community forest in the two case studies where theshift was accomplished. Participants in the two other case studies were alsoasked for their opinion about these two issues. Their answers have beentaken into account in chapter 5 when discussing the role played by the gov-ernment in relation to the shift but do not appear in the table.Table 4.4: Community forestry and RMI fundings linked to the shiftCase study Community Forest RMI fundingWhistler 6 7Sun Peaks 5 1Global percent 25% 43%Table 4.5 shows that most interviewees in Whistler pinpoint the shift484.2. Bottom-up approach resultsmid- to late 1980s with some of them dating it even as precisely as in 1986.This particular date corresponds to a request for summer business propos-als put out by the municipal council. In Sun Peaks, 2011 corresponds tothe year when the RMI funding was awarded to the local government andgiven to Tourism Sun Peaks with a mandate on promoting summer business.Table 4.5: Opinion on the date of the shift for Whistler and Sun PeaksWhistler Sun Peaksdate % # date % #early 80s 12 3 before 2000 14 1mid 80s 27 7 2010 43 3late 80s 19 5 2011 43 3early 90s 15 4late 90s 8 21986 8 2gradual 12 34.2 Bottom-up approach resultsThe bottom-up part of the methods’ main tools are the keyword clouds andthe graphs of interactions. In this section, I present the final clouds andgraphs for each resorts.To give an example of the could use, cloud 1 shows the result of the thirdpass of coding for the Whistler case study. The bigger the font the higherthe number of occurrences: CCF was used 59 times and right beside, EBMwas used 8 times. Another form of results is shown as a table in Annex Ain the case of Whistler.494.2. Bottom-up approach resultsAAC BCparks CCF EBM NIMBY OCP RMI access alpine amenitiesawareness balance bed-community beyond-gvt-regulations boundaries-expansionbusiness-sustainability carrying-capacity chicken-egg cliche climate-change communitycommunity-involvement conflict conscious-action control culture demographicsdestination-vs-local double-edged-sword downhill-mountainbiking economic-opportunitieseducation employees-quality engagement environment equity eventsfire-management forest-management forestry-vs-loggingforestry-vs-tourism global-economy golf government highway hiking historyhistory-repeats-Jumbo housing impact individual involvement life-style lift-companylimit-to-growth locals-vs-tourists location logging logging-visibility management marketingmiddle-class-community milltown monitoring motorized-vs-non mountainbike-resortmountainbiking multi-use multi-users municipalitymunicipality-bike-friendly nature-perception number old-growth opportunitiesorganic-development peak-to-peak people-concentration people-ubiquity powerquality-of-life real-estate recreation-companies recreation-groupsregional-vs-destination resort-survival rogue-trails sacrifice scrutiny second-home-ownersself-regulation shift shoulder-season skiing-decline snow-protection stability stakeholdersstrong-ecosystem summer timing tourism trails valley-trail value-added-forestry valuesvillage visibility visuals winter year-round-employmentCloud 1: Keyword cloud for the final coding pass of the Whistler casestudy.CF ISO-14001 RMI above-regular-standard awareness boundaries-expansion communicationcommunity-engagement community-involvement conferences conflict conscious-actioncontrol-recreation-boundaries destination-resort draw ec-companies economic-opportunitieseconomic-viability education employees-quality environment equity events expansion fireforest-management forestry-vs-tourism golf government housing impact investment life-stylelocation logging-companies logging-roads marketing master-plan milltown mountainbikingmunicipality numbers power quality-of-life real-estate recreation-amenitiesresort-company retirement-destination school scrutiny seasonality self-regulationsense-of-community snow-protection taxes transparency visibility visualsyear-round-employmentCloud 2: Keyword cloud for the final coding pass of the Sun Peaks casestudy.504.2. Bottom-up approach resultsBCpark-proximity access boundaries-expansion bus-shuttle chicken-egg community conflictconscious-action density destination-vs-local economic-opportunity education environmentforest-management funding-issue government impacts incentive investment lack-of locationlogging logging-roads mountainbiking multi-season municipality partnership paving-the-roadpotential pride private-land quality-of-life real-estate recreation-use relationship resort-companyrestrictions stakeholder-involvement timing village visuals year-round-employment ziplineCloud 3: Keyword cloud for the final coding pass of the Mount Washingtoncase study.OCP RMI amenities attract-young-families avalanche-mitigation bedroom-communitycommunication community competition conflict conscious-prevention consultation disconnectioneconomic-opportunity environment environmentalists equity events expectationsforest-management forestry-vs-tourism go-with-the-flow golf governance governmentgovernment-involvement growth housing impact incentives investment lease-removal life-stylelift-company local-government location logging logging-roads management marketingmaster-plan milltown motorized-recreation mountainbiking multi-use municipality no-municipalitynumbers paving-the-road personal-reasons potential proposal quality-of-life real-estate residentsseasonality serinity timing too-late tourism traffic trails visuals weight year-round-employmentCloud 4: Keyword cloud for the final coding pass of the Hemlock Valleycase study.514.2. Bottom-up approach resultsFigure 4.1 shows a graph of interaction for the Whistler case study. Inthis state, it is as pretty as it is useless because of the overwhelming numberof keywords and interactions. Figures 4.2, 4.3 and 4.4 display the other casestudies’ graph of interactions. As explained in chapter 2.2.5 they are usedwith the keyword clouds in order to make themes emerge. Large versions ofthe figures are provided in Annex C.Figure 4.1: A very big and complex graph of keyword interactions (from theWhistler case study).524.2. Bottom-up approach resultsFigure 4.2: Graph of keyword interactions from the Hemlock Valley casestudy.Figure 4.3: Graph of keyword interactions from the Mount Washington casestudy.534.2. Bottom-up approach resultsFigure 4.4: Graph of keyword interactions from the Sun Peaks case study.544.2. Bottom-up approach resultsTo exemplify the use of these graphs, a close-up view of the Sun Peaks’graph of interactions (figure 4.5) shows the links between golf, real estate,and the sense of destination that ensues. It also points to the importance ofgolf for the shoulder seasons due to the conference side of this business. Inthis case the keywords are not linked to anything else because the keywordshift is omitted, as explained in section 2.2.5.As a parallel with another case study, figure 4.6 proposes a close-up viewof the Whistler’s graph. This was more difficult to produce due to the num-ber of interactions, and the analysis needed to be done on larger, printed,graphs. Figure 4.6 hints at the practical issues.The impact of golf for the shift in the late 1980s is here shown to bestrongly connected to real estate but also both location (elevation and globaltopography) and timing (the end of the 1980s being propicious because ofdemographics and a (strange maybe) popularity of some golf figures, suchas Jack Nicklaus21, in the media. The correlation between golf and the shiftis studied in chapter 5.1.2.Figure 4.5: Close-up on the graph of keyword interactions from the SunPeaks case study, focusing on golf.21of the Nicklaus North Golf Course in Whistler fame, of course.http://www.nicklaus.com/design/nicklausnorth/554.2. Bottom-up approach resultsFigure 4.6: Close-up on the graph of keyword interactions from the Whistlercase study, focusing on golf.56Chapter 5Research questions answeredThe main research question was formalized as: how does a shift in seasonalmanagement of a mountain resort influence or change the way the surround-ing forest is managed? Quite rapidly, during the bibliography and duringthe interaction with stakeholders involved in each of the communities se-lected as case studies, a side question emerged about the benefits for thecommunity from a quality of life point of view.For reference here are the 3 hypothesis from chapter 1.1.1.• Hypothesis 1: The business shift leads to an expansion of the managedforest’s boundaries from ski slopes to broader mountain range. Thisexpansion leads to ecological and socio-economic effects as a broaderarea will be used by all stakeholders in the community.• Hypothesis 2: The business shift leads to a change of values’ weightingfor socio-economical management of the forests surrounding the com-munities. The forests may become a higher value asset for tourismand a shift in their management may be seen, allowing for instancefor community-based forestry and multiple value management (awayfrom a business based solely on timber extraction).• Hypothesis 3: The resort’s scale, location, culture and economy havean influence over the opportunities and challenges related to the shiftIt is pretty clear and straightforward to assert that the shift is a businessshift, driven primarily by economic reasons and by the people living in thecommunity who want to live better22.In this chapter, I address the main questions posed in the research. First,I examine the factors that allowed the shift to be successful or that preventedit from happening. I attempt to distinguish between causality and corre-lation as many factors are difficult to separate from the actual shift. It is22I will refrain to make a judgement in linking quality of life and economic success575.1. The shift to all-seasons operationevident that a shift needs a conscious effort to occur and will not be anorganic event, but some of the relationships and links are not as straightfor-ward. I then examine the effect of the shift on forestry practices, followedby an assessment of the environmental impacts and mitigation strategiesthat ensue due to the shift. Lastly, I reflect on the (potential) increase inthe quality of life of the communities associated with the shift. This break-down does not really follow the three hypotheses but it seemed to me tomake the most sense in terms of understanding the case studies and theirhistories before addressing forest management and environmental impacts.5.1 The shift to all-seasons operationThe four case studies covered different locations (all in BC, Canada), differ-ent sizes of resort and also different histories. Each had different amountsof information available concerning how the shift is happening or happened,what could trigger it, what could make it successful or what could preventit from happening. This is mostly in relation to hypothesis 3: “the resort’sscale, location, culture and economy have an influence over the opportunitiesand challenges related to the shift.” It is difficult to envision if it would bepossible to generalize from these four case studies, whether to a similar ge-ographical situation in the same province, or to another country altogether.After considering the nature of the data, any generalization is probably in-valid.However, I intended to try to identify the criteria for a positive shift andthe mechanisms that would need to be in place to make it a beneficial expe-rience. When done correctly, such a shift could be a powerful socio-economicengine that could avoid dramatic environmental damage. This argument isdeveloped below, but it is important to first discuss the mechanisms at playIn the following subsection, I show the necessary conditions and mech-anisms that would allow the shift to occur in a successful manner. I thenexamine some aspects of the shift, including mountain biking, golfing andproximity to BC parks and their correlation with the shift. Lastly the casestudies of Hemlock Valley and Mount Washington will be used to better un-derstand the conditions that could prevent a community from undertakingthe shift.585.1. The shift to all-seasons operation5.1.1 A successful shiftOrganic development was envisioned as one of the possibilities for the shift’smechanism in earlier pre-field study stages of this project, and while analysingliterature. This organic development would involve a variety of different fac-tors with nothing particularly discernible in terms of actual shifting date,cause or trigger. The case studies of Whistler and Sun Peaks actually showthe opposite. As one respondent from Whistler says:“Nothing organic happens in Whistler.” [Whistler]Indeed, Whistler’s shift can be described as triggered by a conscious ac-tion from a group of very involved and committed individuals. This seemsfundamental in performing the shift. Figure 5.1 shows that most intervie-wees pinpoint the shift mid- to late 1980s with some of them dating it evenas precisely as in 1986. This particular date corresponds to a request forsummer business proposals put out by the municipal council.Figure 5.1: Perception of the shift’s period or date in Whistler.After the evaluation period, three proposals were accepted and funded:two golf courses and a tennis resort, the latter of which was not successful23.The mayor of Whistler at that time is clear about this particular event beingthe shift starting point:23my opinion is that one can play tennis pretty much everywhere and the surroundingsdo not play a significant role in the activity595.1. The shift to all-seasons operation“Sure I can pinpoint a date: 1986. I was elected mayor ofWhistler in 1986 and at that time the municipality didn’t havea parks department. They had maybe two little parks and nosummer infrastructure. They had the valley trail which is anamazing facility. So I set out as a mayor to build a summerbusiness here. And what we did was offer development rights topeople to build facilities, so for instance the Chaˆteau Whistlergolf course got built, Nicklaus North got built, there is a ten-nis facility that never got built but it is still on the table, thedeveloper hasn’t built the development but it was one of the pro-posals. a call for summer amenities. I am not taking full creditfor it, the aesthetics were always here... When I came here in1971 summer was beautiful, there were mosquitoes the size ofVolkswagens mind you but it was gorgeous.” [Whistler, formermayor]These statements (with the exception of the Volkswagen-sized mosquitoes)are confirmed by different respondents in the community:“It was direct direction from council and the municipality say-ing ’we need to make this year-round’ and probably Whistler-Blackcomb and Tourism Whistler were involved. [...] Certainlyit was not organic, it was a concious decision of our local gov-ernment to attract business which would make our summers abusy time.” [Whistler]“The first OCP defines 45,000 as the number of beds that wouldbe built in Whistler. The OCP of 1990, for a rounder number...Well, the question that was posed to the community was: ’areyou in favour of creating another 7.500 bed units that would beawarded to developers who would bring forward proposals thatwould contribute to the progression of Whistler to a full-seasonresort?’ specifically to provide golf. There were two sports thatwere identified: tennis and golf. At the time, in the late 80s,tennis and golf were both growing very rapidly.” [Whistler]This last quote is interesting because it provides a link between the con-scious action to shift and the bed unit concept, which is very unique toWhistler. This concept has been extensively studied as a limit-to-growthtool [Gill, 2000, Gill and Williams, 1994, 2011] but not in relation to theshift. Even if it cannot be directly linked to the shift it is an essential con-cept for this research because it shows a care for the environment and a605.1. The shift to all-seasons operationsense of values that I argue to be necessary for a successful shift. Besidesthe quotes also show that there is a strong link to leadership and many con-versations that I had in the community mention that the mentality of thecommunity government (outdoor life-style enthusiasts, very attached to thelocation, etc.) was one of the factors leading to the shift being tried out.Of course, a direct action from the municipality is not inherently suffi-cient, as a number of other factors need to be present. First, going backwardsin the chronology of events, I believe that municipality status was essentialfor the shift to happen. (Later the status of resort community was createdand used to get the RMI funding; this proved essential for Sun Peaks). Beinga municipality provides a governing body of political and economic impor-tance allowing for easier communication and negotiation with the provincialgovernment and other government bodies such as the Ministry of Forests (orequivalent at the time of this research). Also, resort communities are usu-ally quite unique in their needs and functioning; being affiliated to regionaldistricts with radically different geographies, economies and basic needs isvery detrimental to the resorts’ development. The two following quotes fromrespondents in Hemlock Valley and Mount Washington highlight this issueof communities being different from the people governing them:“Our local government here resides in Chilliwack, which is aboutone foot above sea level. That’s their life, that’s where they grewup, that’s what they do... They have no conception whatsoeverof what happens when you elevate yourself 3.300 feet. We arejust down the road from Chilliwack but half a mile up. Our livesare totally different. With respect to environmental concern,access, etc. we are radically different from Chilliwack and ourgovernment has no idea. They just think that we are part ofthe regional district and that we fit like everybody else does.”[Hemlock Valley]“The ski industry in the province has a governance issue. Whistlersolved it because the have the municipality, Sun Peaks is in theprocess, they formed a municipality and they have a resort as-sociation. The rest of us, because we do not have a populationlarge enough to have a local government, we got tagged along tothe next government, which is the regional district, here it is theComox Valley.” [Mount Washington]615.1. The shift to all-seasons operationTo keep on progressing backwards chronologically, some other necessaryingredients to become incorporated as a municipality include a strong senseof community (as already hinted at with the need for strong leadership) andan appropriate number of permanent residents. Location is also fundamentalbecause it provides assets. So, regressing further back in time, to allow acommunity to develop with a strong sense of commitment and be successfulduring the summer, a resort should possess fundamental viable amenities:lakes, a valley bottom suitable for golfing, etc. In the case of Whistler,the proximity to Garibaldi provincial park is obviously also a strong asset,both for summer and for winter. One respondent from Hemlock Valleycommented:“[...] Lower elevation ski areas like Whistler do better. Theirsnow is gone and they can have golf course and hiking trailsget open sooner. [...] We had an ATV event two years ago atHemlock where they had to actually go up and plough out thesnow, in August! On the north facing slopes of the mountain,to get the ATV tracks open... It’s a difficult environment: it’s alittle bit too high to grow grass so you can’t really have golf upthere.” [Hemlock Valley]Location is also critical because although proximity to bigger cities meansa large market base to draw upon, too close a proximity will prevent a com-munity becoming incorporated as a separate municipality (setting aside thenumber of residents necessary), as can be seen in this quote from a partici-pant in the Mount Washington case study:“In the case of Sun Peaks, the distance and traveling time fromKamloops have been just far enough to really substantiate andsupport that drive [the incorporation as a resort municipality]. Ithink Mount Washington is just a little bit too close to Cumber-land and Courtenay and Comox. I can’t foresee that happeningat least within the next 20 years.” [Mount Washington]It is difficult to disentangle the yarn ball of municipality and strongcommunity. I am think that both terms were used interchangeably by someparticipants. However, the sense of community (that can indeed manifestitself through an incorporation as a municipality) and the strength it givesare expressed clearly with this quote from a respondent in Sun Peaks:“But then there is a whole transition that has to take place andthat is that you have to become a community. That’s why I625.1. The shift to all-seasons operationthink you do need a local government. Because then things likeeducation are possible, you can have local schools. [...] I trulybelieve that to be a great resort you must be a great community.”[Sun Peaks]From the point of view of the relationship with higher level of governmentit is beyond question that having a local government helps the communityin its negotiations, whether the community is small or big, as this quoteshows:“And obviously the government looks upon a commercial oper-ation, i.e. the resort company, differently than they look uponthe community represented by the municipality. So there is anadvantage in being in an organized environment like a munici-pality for the resort in total because the government will look atthem differently, for instance the ability to create a communityforest.” [Sun Peaks]The most important factor affecting the shift was without doubt theadoption of the planned shift by the municipality. In the case of Sun Peaks,it more importantly was a resort municipality, a denomination that has beeneffectively defined by Whistler. This gave access to Resort MunicipalityInitiative (RMI) funding, which is critical. Such funding is not restrictedto mountain resorts; Tofino and Ucluelet are good examples of the use ofRMI funding for tourism community planning. Most participants from SunPeaks positioned the shift in 2010 or 2011 (6 out of 7 respondents) whichcoincides with the incorporation as a municipality and the denomination ofresort municipality. Sun Peaks made the interesting choice to give all theirRMI money to Tourism Sun Peaks on the condition that it would be usedexclusively to help increase summer business, mostly through the creationof large events. A participant from the community explains:“Now, since the municipality was formed, we were able to obtainthe RMI funding, which is 3% of the hotel tax, which amounts toapproximately 300.000 CAD/year, a little bit more. And we wereable to sit down with Tourism SunPeaks and say: ’we will provide300.000 CAD/year to you, in exchange we want you to developa plan for summer season, we think it has to be focused onthe biggest potential draw which would be big names concerts.’Something that would put Sun Peaks on the map not only as amountain resort but also as a summer destination. [...] But one635.1. The shift to all-seasons operationthing that the municipal concil said was that we did not wantany of the 300.000 CAD going into the winter.” [Sun Peaks]And larger events it created, with none other than Kevin Costner (andhis band: Kevin Costner and Modern West24) coming to play in the summerof 2012, close to the anniversary of the municipality. The concert was freefor the public, which was clearly a marketing strategy used to bring visitorsto the resort and have them experience what it has to offer in the summer.The perception of the public is still that a ski resort is a winter place tobe, as I will explain in chapter 5.3.1. The community hosted events everyweekend from June 30th to September 29th in 2012. The short history ofSun Peaks in chapter 3.5 shows that 2012 was indeed a successful summer.One of the respondents in the community qualifies 2011 as a “pivotal year”due to RMI funding:“2011 was also a pivotal year for us and made us believers inourselves: RMI came in and provided a significant investmentinto summer. So all of sudden we were able to bring large scaletalent, which brought up thousands of people, not 10s and 20s.”[Sun Peaks]This further demonstrates the importance of events in performing theshift. In Whistler there is also an event every weekend during the wholesummer period (and also during the so-called shoulder seasons), sometimescultural sometimes sporting, and often mixed. They recognize that a sig-nificant proportion of the numbers in the summer are attracted by theseevents. It is also recognized as a major draw by participants from other casestudies, for instance from Hemlock Valley, describing Mount Washington:“But they [Mount Washington] have an event every weekendthrough the summer: beer and wine, bike race, music... whichgives a reason for people to go there. That is what Hemlockwould have to do as well.” [Hemlock Valley]5.1.2 Some external factors correlated to the shiftIn this section, I examine the correlations between the shift and summeractivities, specifically mountain biking and golf. I also present the villageand easy access in relation to the shift, with Whistler as a specific example.24That seemed to have worked quite well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=resK18omolM645.1. The shift to all-seasons operationThe advent of mountain bikingThe rise of mountain biking is linked to the shift. There is no significantevidence that one predated the other and all concur to a “chicken and egg”situation. I think that it is valid to use the concept of an organic growth.A large part of the success of summer business for Whistler is based on thefact that the community gradually became known as a destination resortfor mountain biking, even if I do not hold this responsible for the start ofthe shift, despite an interviewee pinpointing the shift to 1992, with the firstlarge downhill event in the resort:“[F]or sure it was the downhill mountain bikes festival or thegrowth of the downhill sports in the 90s that turned us into adestination.” [Whistler]This particular individual was very involved in mountain biking and tendedto relate the whole history of Whistler to the advent of this sport. However,mountain biking clearly now defines the summer in this resort. Mountainbiking was very supported by the local government and it was an integralpart of the definition of Whistler, even more so nowadays, as pointed outby many respondents:“With the introduction of mountainbiking, it revolutionized whatWhistler is in the summer.” [Whistler]“When I came here people worked as much as they could inthe summer so that they could ski more in the winter, I havefriends now who live in Whistler and they put their head downand work all winter so they can have more time to mountainbikein the summer. And that’s becoming more common. Becausethere has been a fairly supporting local government approach tomountainbike” [Whistler]“We have the best and the most popular mountainbike park inthe world. and there are resort around the world that are usingour example, our model. So we have become a mountainbikemecca. And what helped us with that is also that we have dif-ferent festivals: we have one put out by Whistler-Blackcombcalled Crankworx and that brings people with their mountain-bikes from all over the world, mostly North America, and nowwe are known as a biking community.” [Whistler]655.1. The shift to all-seasons operationHowever, mountain biking is not “the goose that lays the golden eggs”. Itrequires amenities and investment and Whistler had been putting emphasison this aspect for almost two decades. The Whistler Mountain Bike Parkcelebrated its 10th anniversary in 2008. The lift company heavily investedin lifts adapted for mountain biking, as commented by a participant fromthe community:“There are other mountain resorts using the lifts to take bicy-cles up to the top and allow them to come down but Whistler-Blackcomb really refined that business model. They invested inpurpose built trails, they converted their chairs not to carry onemountain bike but four and invested a lot of money in develop-ing the whole concept of a mountain bike park. And that washappening at the same time when the North Shore was recog-nized as a hub for new school and extreme mountain biking.”[Whistler]And indeed, in Hemlock Valley, the resort owner did not make the necessaryinvestments and the activity has only been tried on a few occasions, withoutmuch success. The reason given was that the experience provided to thevisitors was not sufficient with the level of equipment available. (Yet it maybe useful to associate this factor with the management attitude towardssummer, which will be described in chapter 5.1.3). A respondent from thecommunity recalled:“The new owner doesn’t want to open for mountain biking untilwe have a detachable quad because when we had the mountainbike race last summer, we had to literally just take out a 24 yearold lift and slow it right down so we could load the bikes and loadthe people so it took you forever to get to the top. Not quitewhat you want for an experience for people coming up here.”[Hemlock Valley]Similarly, in Mount Washington the management decided to stop open-ing their lifts to mountain bikers because it was not economically viable dueto the poor response from the local market. Two lifts would have neededto be operated to provide enough interest for visitors but only one lift couldbe open in order to cover the costs. As expressed by an interview from theresort:“[... A]nd then we went into mountain biking probably 12 or 13years ago. We had high expectations, we saw the Whistler model,665.1. The shift to all-seasons operationwe thought that it was a sport that was going to expand but itseems to have flattened out, especially here. The options to goout moutain biking are everywhere and it’s free. Cumberland, asmall town nearby here, their parking lot in the weekend is full,you cannot find a place to park there are so many bikers outthere. So we’ve dropped that part of it” [Mount Washington]It is fairly obvious from all the case studies that mountain biking is avery powerful business tool for summer operations. It needs to be embracedby the community and the resort or lift company as the investments areimportant but the community also needs to be “bike friendly” in order forthe symbiosis to work properly. I do not relate it more strongly to the shiftbecause I do not think it triggered or caused it - in the case of Whistler froma date perspective and in the case of Sun Peaks because it was already wellestablished as an activity and they did not have any choice other than toembrace it. Gravity parks and downhill mountain biking are now an integralpart of what a mountain resort has to offer.Golf in the 1980sGolf is another very important factor: both Whistler and Sun Peaks resortspossess renowned golfing facilities. The histories of both resorts show a cor-relation between the construction of golf courses and the shift. However, Iprefer to see golf as a means to an end: it indeed gives a very strong in-dication of will to operate during the summer and therefore is heavily tiedto real estate, which is the economic engine of development of mountainresorts. Yet I do not perceive it as a cause for shifting. A respondent in SunPeaks explains these ties:“From an investor standpoint it [the 18-hole golf course] is asignificant statement because you are investing a lot to build agolf course and you are not paying it off for sure, unless yousell real estate. It was a statement. Aside from Whistler, SunPeaks is the only resort with a golf course. So it immediatelydistinguished Sun Peaks from peer resorts suchas Silver Star orBig White. It made us different and for someone who is lookingat investing in real estate is shows that we are thinking yearround.” [Sun Peaks]Golf is also a critical part of the business diversification when shifting to ayear-round operation as it means that a resort does not have to rely solely on675.1. The shift to all-seasons operationscenic beauty. It attracts different socio-demographic classes and it benefitedheavily from a big interest that occurred around the time of the Whistlershift (mid- to late 1980s). An interviewee from Whistler commented:“[A]s the golf courses got built that attracted a different kind oftourists, golf was huge in the 90s, with big tournaments with allthe big guys. [...] that’s when we started seeing bus tours withold folks and senior citizens which we had never seen before.’Why are they coming here, what is there to do for them?’ ”[Whistler]In a similar manner to mountain biking large mountain resorts are ex-pected to propose high class golf courses to their guests during summeroperations. It is also an integral part of the “packages” that are sold to con-ference organizers. That is very important as it is the most used businesstool to fill up the shoulder seasons, when hotel occupation rates are usuallythe lowest.The Whistler village and the Sea-to-Sky highwayInterestingly, it was commented by a participant from the Mount Wash-ington case study that the presence of a village, such as the one built inWhistler (see chapter 3.2) is necessary for the success of a resort:“What we are missing here is that little boutique-y village andthat would be kind of the next step to grow in the summer, withshopping options, dining options, spa... Then I think we couldsee summer going to a different level.” [Mount Washington]This can be related to chapter 1.3.4 and the dichotomy between thevillage-resort and the ex-nihilo resort in Europe. Whistler’s village has beencreated with the integrated resort mixed with the traditional mountain vil-lage in mind to capitalize on both aspects: convenience for skiers and senseof community. It is undeniable that the village in Whistler is a touristattraction in its own right, as stated by a respondent in the community:“And then there is the village which in itself is a tourist at-traction, I mean today is a Monday [June 2013] and there are1,200 people out there just having a look and have lunch. Maybethey’ll go up and have the peak-to-peak. [...] I always thoughtthat summer was hardcore recreation but then when the villagegot started I realized that there is a lot of people that like to685.1. The shift to all-seasons operationcome and just look at other people. to look at the flowers, topossibly stay in a nice hotel and go out for a walk into naturebut always knowing they can run back to safety... Asians forinstance are not the most rec-athletic people but they really likethat shopping, walking, eating, whatever... I learned somethingwhen I saw that.” [Whistler]The last factor that I can strongly correlate to a successful shift is easyaccess. The construction of the Sea-to-Sky highway for the Olympic gamesin 2010 has impacted the local economy. It is not as straightforward as goodaccess is beneficial, because while it may open the market for visitors comingfrom a distance, it also enables local visitors to use the resort for day tripsand does not impact as much on hotel occupation.“There is a trade off in terms of the highway. So from the Van-couver market, push and pull, but further away, like the Wash-ington State market or beyond, it’s a real plus. It makes it moreof a viable experience for them.” [Whistler]From an environmental point of view, it would have been better to imple-ment or reinstate the railway transportation system rather than upgrad-ing the highway, offering alternative ways of transportation to automobiles.Since the Olympics were advertised as a commitment towards sustainabil-ity, I cannot help but feel that there was a lost opportunity here. This maysimply be a European perspective, since the railway system is so much bet-ter developed there. This is not to say that the situation with ski resortsis infinitely better in Europe but there are many French, Swiss, Austrian,and Italian examples of train stations in very close proximity to ski resortsor mountain villages, with free buses/shuttles to the actual resorts and liftbase stations.Almost all participants in Hemlock Valley and Mount Washington re-ferred to the paving of the road or lack thereof as a critical factor for thewell-being of the business and their community. The fact that the road toHemlock resort is still a gravel road is seen as an indication of a lack ofinterest from the resort management. However, paving a mountain road isvery costly and is difficult to be financed by only one institution, being theresort company or BC Parks. At Mount Washington, the costs for pavingthe road were shared by the resort and the government due to the presenceof Strathcona park, but the resort still had to make a significant investment.A participant from the community explained:695.1. The shift to all-seasons operation“Everytime you have a piece of properties it has to be attachedto a road. That’s how it started. Then in 89 with the shiftto year-round it became obvious we had to do something withthat road because it was 19 km of puddles and mud... So wemade a deal with the government. First of all they purchasedthe road, it became a government highway, second we made adeal to pave the road. It was about Can$ 16 million to pave it.The government paid half because it is not a road to the resort,it is a road to Strathcona park, but we would be the primaryrecipient so we put a tax on lift tickets and we’d pay every year.But we saw the point two or three years ago when we saw no endin sight, like a mortgage that goes forever, because we were notgetting the visits we anticipated. So we made an offer, a businessdeal and bought it. It was an interesting evolution, we’ve had tohelp pay for the road.” [Mount Washington]5.1.3 Factors potentially preventing the shift fromhappeningThis analysis comes primarily from the Hemlock Valley resort case studyand from the current status of Mount Washington resort as the two othercommunities have performed a successful shift and are now considered yearround (or at least a winter and summer mountain resort with the infamousshoulder seasons).These two communities can be considered incarnations of the mill town25.Both are dominated by a single resort or lift company. Equity in relation tothe shift is something that is envisioned and discussed later in chapter 5.4.A respondent from Hemlock Valley was very clear about this:“[... K]eeping in mind we are a mill town. Like any mill townin the province, anywhere in the world. Powell River is a milltown, big pulp mill there. So if the mill disappears Powell Riveris going to shrink. We are the same way: the resort is our mill,they decide to open the 15th of December then we are in businessthe 15th of December. If they decide a week earlier or a weeklater, that’s when we start. Our season will end the day whenthey stop operating and that is usually around the first week ofApril. We rely on them to do good business, when don’t do good25or the mining town of the Wild West if one prefers that metaphor.705.1. The shift to all-seasons operationbusiness, and I can tell you that many many many cases in thepast that’s happened, we suffer. That’s the reliance we have onthe resort.” [Hemlock Valley]On the other hand, a resort company is a bit different from a mill or a miningcompany in the sense that it does not rely on a non-renewable resource thatcan be depleted, as expressed by this participant from Sun Peaks:“It is different from a mining company because it is a resort andif this company would go broke somebody different would comeand get up, this isn’t going away. I still believe that the natureof the beast is that when you are kind of a single business towneverybody in town hates the big company. And my experiencetells me that it is true even outside of ski resorts.” [Sun Peaks]Nonetheless, in the case of a small resort still primarily operating asa winter-only business, if the resort company (or the lift company) doesn’tshow any interest in performing the shift it is very unlikely to happen. Hem-lock Valley is an excellent example of this. The following quotes express thefeelings of some participants concerning how the management’s attitude af-fects their development as a community:“From a behavioural perspective it is possible that the local man-agement simply doesn’t want to work in the summer time. Theywant to fish, [...] they want to play golf, and that would notbe the first time that a business plan has been built around therecreation activities of the management team.” [Hemlock Valley]“So here we have a situation where the province, Tourism BC,wants motorized recreation to be supported in the province, theyare spending money on that right now and working very hardto have it recognized as tourism. We have a community here atHemlock Valley that wants it. And we have a resort that saysno. Whistler and Big White and all 44 resorts in the provinceare saying: ’Come on you quaders, come to our house’ exceptHemlock. Hemlock is saying: ’Stay away we don’t want you.’That’s a management decision.” [Hemlock Valley]The owner of the resort is applying for development rights via a masterplan. The master plan is still in the process of being approved as describedin chapter 3.3 and is arguably a bit too ambitious given the difficulties ex-pressed earlier in this chapter about location. However, if the owner is ready715.1. The shift to all-seasons operationto invest, all criteria (environmental assessment, etc.) are met and the gov-ernment agrees, development will occur.At Mount Washington, the shift did not occur to the level of the twosuccessful case studies mostly due to a lack of resident base and to economicdifficulties. During the time frame of this study, the resort has been putup for sale. It is clear for one of the respondents that the absence of “real”community is a significant issue:“There is no community here, if there were a community it wouldbe a little different.” [Mount Washington]During my visit to the resort in July 2013, it was evident that very littlewas happening and the feeling was not of a little town but of a very slowvacation spot. This also ties in with an earlier quote showing the importanceof the presence of a village.My four case studies only give a partial picture and some other phenom-ena could play a role. During one of my discussions with the Ph.D. studentfrom France mentioned in chapter 2.2.1, she mentioned that, in some ofher case studies, unwillingness to collaborate from local actors/stakeholderswere responsible for preventing the shift. In one case, two municipalities arenot collaborating even if they share the same hill/mountain for their tourismbusiness. There is an extra layer of complexity due to the involvement of theFrench government and the access to grants but the situations is basicallystuck due to what is called in France “une querelle de clocher” (literally “aparochial quarrel”). In the case of this research the studied communitieswhich did not perform the shift were not of a size sufficiently important toreach an inner conflict preventing the shift. The aforementioned issues arein my opinion too predominant.As a side note, First Nations’ interests have been identified as a majorhurdle in making the shift, and they would have a direct influence when de-velopment is situated on their ancestral territory. However, in many cases,tourism is a business that can be profitable for all stakeholders and collabora-tions are evident, as are legal battles. Examples of successful collaborationsas well as difficult trials abound in each case studies.725.2. Forest management changes due to the shift5.1.4 ConclusionThe factors that allow a shift to occur and to become a successful businessmodel are numerous and difficult to separate. The history and geographyand scale of resorts definitely play important roles in the capacity to performa shift. Most importantly geographical assets and the number of residentsnumber make a big difference. It seems that a combination of market num-bers, appropriate location and good timing is necessary, together with atleast the birthing of a community with a strong enough sense of commu-nity to foster leadership leading to incorporation into a municipality. Sincethe inception of Whistler as a year-round resort in the late 1980s, the gov-ernment created the status of resort municipality which gives access to theRMI funding which, in turn, when used wisely (such as to create attractiveevents during the summer), is a very powerful tool to perform the shift. Inany case, a shift does not just happen, it is triggered by members of thecommunity.Mountain biking and golfing are also critical aspects of summer tourismthat need to be included for any resort willing to perform the shift, or whichis to be created ex-nihilo. However, they represent substantial investments,need amenities, and are not the magic solution for a successful shift.Lastly, in the case of small communities lacking the numbers to becomemunicipalities, the willingness of the resort or lift company to perform theshift is critical as the community is then similar to a “mill town.”5.2 Forest management changes due to the shiftThis first quote is quite representative of the views of respondents who areresidents in Whistler:“Why would we really need to manage the forest if there wasno summer tourism? In the winter nobody really cared if therewere old-growth [trees] while snowmobiling. [...] In the mid 70sand 80s there was intensive forestry, any AAC or TSA was overa 100.000 cubic metres a year, it was massive. They were justraping and pillaging in the forest, everybody was shocked and of-fended by it for environmental reasons but from a resort perspec-tive it didn’t really have any interplay. So there is no questionthat the expansion into summer and the year-round conversion735.2. Forest management changes due to the shifthad a major impact on the development of the demands on thelandbase and the forest.” [Whistler]However, as seen in the following two quotes, forest professionals inWhistler and Hemlock Valley have very different perceptions about the ex-tent of change.“I do not think that the [forest] management has changed dra-matically: the magnitude of tourism has increased.” [Whistler]“It is really no different. So for us it will be just another consul-tation that we deal with.” [Hemlock Valley]This suggests that shift or no shift, professionals do not really see orexperience a significant difference. However, in depth discussions with theCheakamus Community Forest’s forest manager revealed otherwise. Muchof his engineering work is radically different from what is usually done, evenwhen operating in close proximity to a resort. This management positionwas filled by this particular individual because of his interest in multi-useand multi-values forest management and long involvement in the commu-nity. Consequently, he may not see it as a major change even if the typeof management performed is quite advanced in terms of Ecosystem-BasedManagement and recreational values management. For the remaining stake-holders, it is evident that a change in forestry practices is expected whenoperating within or around a mountain resort: 12 out of 21 interviewees inWhistler, 3 out of 7 in Sun Peaks and 3 out of 6 in Hemlock Valley specifi-cally indicated that the shift has induced or would induce a change in forestmanagement.As illustrated in the quotes below from respondents from Hemlock Valleyresort the only difference in their practices would derive from a change inthe land base if the master plan for a significant expansion of the resort wereto be approved. However, it is still unclear whether the master plan will beapproved.“You are going to have Tamahi [Logging] and those boys to quitlogging. You can’t have them come in and log everything whileyou’re trying to run a mountain community.” [Hemlock Valley]“If they would take it as is right now and convert it to summerstuff it would not affect us a lot. We are not logging right on the745.2. Forest management changes due to the shiftresort. But the extension project, if that were to go further, thatwould affect us. The government would change leases and reducetimber the harvesting land base.” [Hemlock Valley, RPFs]In Whistler, the vast majority of participants expressed a belief thatthe shift directly implicated a change towards visual and recreational valuesin forest management even if they did not mention specifically a change inmanagement practices. Given the type of stakeholder groups in the sample,this is not totally surprising. Still, in Whistler, an interesting distinctionfrom other resorts is undoubtedly the presence of a community forest —thefirst community forest to be awarded to a community not in the timber ex-traction business. Although, the community forest includes three partners(the Lil’wat and Squamish First Nations and the Resort Municipality ofWhistler), only Whistler is heavily invested in tourism.The link between the community forest and the shift is detailed in sub-section 5.2.2. However, Whistler has played a role in the change of practicesin forest management and notably in the acceptance of recreation values bythe government (Ministry of Forests) as early as 1986-1987, which is aboutthe time that I identify as the turning point of the shift in this particularcase study. The two following quotes from long-time residents of Whistlerprovide insights about these changes:“When we see the municipality finally waking up that wouldbe the beginning of the shift, that would be the modified treefarm, 1986. [...] That was when the municipality started toconsider the fact that there are all these logging operations goingon around us and we are becoming a major resort. We almostpulled it [i.e. the modified tree farm licence] out in 1986 and1987 was the time when Ted Nebbeling became the mayor andtook some direct action on the flank of the south west ridge ofWhistler, with the timber license. It could have been literallyclear cut, a huge piece, probably 2 or 3 timber licenses so atleast a 1000 acres... and he brought it up in heat. And therewas this very very bright forestry officer Don C. who agreed andarranged, which had never been done before, a shift of timberlicenses.” [Whistler]“In the 80s there was a plan to do a lot of logging in the southside of Whistler. That laid the ground work for the municipality755.2. Forest management changes due to the shiftto say that they needed to get control over the harvesting becausewe are a year-round resort now and we don’t want people to seea big huge clear cut as the first thing they view of Whistler. SoWhistler was protecting its interests.” [Whistler]These statements are interesting in more than one way: first they pro-vide historically relevant information because they tie the idea of the shiftto the municipality and to some individuals as previously proposed, and alsobecause I would argue that forest management practices and recognition ofrecreation values by the forestry industry are entangled with the birth ofsome recreationists’ behaviour and nature perception and led organically towhat is now known and implemented, and it originated in Whistler duringthe time of the shift.26In the next subsections, I examine the hypothesis about boundary expan-sion and the effects on forest perception and management. I then discuss thelink with community based forest management, specifically the CheakamusCommunity Forest, and draw some conclusions about community involve-ment associated with the boundary expansion.5.2.1 Boundary expansion and stakeholder involvementExpansion of the system boundaries due to recreationist numbersThe core of hypothesis 1 is that the land base occupied by the resorts ex-panded because of the shift and that it triggered changes in the values asso-ciated with the forests. The land base being considered is that accessed andused by the resorts’ users (local recreationists, tourists, etc.). I expected tosee evidence of this expansion from mostly winter ski slopes to a larger landbase during the summer. This would be due to differences in recreationalactivities but also to changing access possibilities after the snow has melted.Most of the participants agreed about the presence of recreationists every-where on the land base during the summer as opposed to a concentration ondesignated slopes during winter, with summer recreationists going furtherafield. This does not imply that there is no activity outside of groomedslopes during winter. Off-piste skiing or snowboarding, with the side ef-fect of having to go and fetch stranded visitors, not to mention avalancheissues, is very popular. Snowmobiling or backcountry skiing are also prac-ticed outside of the recreation area boundaries. Numbers are just greater26another classical example of the chicken and egg conundrum.765.2. Forest management changes due to the shiftduring summer. However, it is unclear whether the shift is directly respon-sible for this. Perhaps it simply denotes a change in the recreational habitsof people and their relationship to nature, at least within the sample base.The strong tradition of outdoors activity amongst the participants may haveencouraged this idea. As the following Whistler respondents noted:“Yes, you are bang on [with the boundaries expansion hypothe-sis] because as we moved to the summer our emphasis went fromthe mountain to the whole valley, and to the aesthetics of thewhole valley and clearly logging is important...” [Whistler]“Part of it is indeed due to expansion but I think it has moreto do with the different market sectors. A skier, as a marketsector, requires a very compact development, they don’t go veryfar from the lifts. In the summer the market segment is moreparcelized: hikers, motorsports recreationists, adrenaline seekerswith the Ziptreck, wilderness adventurers, bird watchers, rockclimbers, water sports... So the fact is they need more land andmore diverse geographical types for recreation.” [Whistler]Or from a strictly visual perspective:“ [...] you need to protect these view corridors, specifically fromthe valley bottom, so that feeling of being in a forested environ-ment persists. because people come from around the world toexperience that feeling here. And then we go 6,000 feet up onthe mountain and we are looking over greater areas, so the viewcorridor increased substantially.” [Whistler]This indicates the prominence of visual attributes in the experiencesought by users of the forests surrounding the resort. As the quote be-low illustrates, during the summer one can witness different user behavioursand perceptions in relation to the expansion that is directly linked to theshift.“It is often said that skiers are actors of our environment butsummer visitors are spectators of the environment, far moreaware of the ecology because it is in their face more and theyspread out more. They are everywhere in the summer: the lakes,the multitude of trails that web this entire valley... There is justway way more activity.” [Whistler]775.2. Forest management changes due to the shiftFrom a forest management perspective (albeit that of a non-RPF), itseems that a greater weight on visual and aesthetic attributes should beexpected. To manage this, a greater involvement from the communities isrequired. In the case of Whistler it is very clear that this involvement oc-curs, whereas with Hemlock Valley the lack of consultation is widely felt. Inmost cases the bottom line for the manager is the amount of money to bemade from cutting down the trees versus managing them for tourism use.This determines which values are dominant. Unfortunately, it has provedimpossible to get actual numbers concerning the value of forest managementfor tourism other than the oft-cited public relations figures on the impactof tourism on the provincial economy of “a million CAD per day in taxrevenue to the province in the late 90s and that number is only growing”27.On the BC Stats website28 the following statement can be found: “In 2004,Whistler took in Can$178.3 million in accommodation room revenues, sec-ond only to downtown Vancouver (Can$407.5 million). [...] contribut[ing]21% of the total accommodation room revenue in Mainland Southwest De-velopment Region, and 11% of the provincial total.” However, the 2004/05ski season was a bad one, due to low snowfall, with “revenue (CAn$114.9million) slumped 8.3%, dropping to a six-year-low level”. These figures onlygive information based on accommodations, nothing about restaurants, lifttickets, commercial recreation, alcohol taxes, etc. That being said, it is clearthat the tourism value is very different to the value that the CCF makes byselling logs (Can$ 1.8 million for 23,280 cubic meters in 2013). However, Iam uncertain about the modifiers that are used in the calculation for thefinal numbers and nobody was able29 to provide more details. These twonumbers are difficult, if not impossible, to compare. They still denote or-ders of magnitude of difference and tend to confirm that the contribution offorestry to the economy of Whistler is not significant in relation to tourism.However, the available figures do not help answering the question whethera tree is more valuable left standing than harvested as a piece of timber.The ubiquity of the public in the forest also has a direct effect on pro-fessional/operational practices when operations are being conducted in theforest, as access may have to be temporarily restricted for safety reasons.However, because forestry is such a major industry in BC, local people tend27which is sort of a RMOW corporate answer that I got a lot...28http://bcstats.gov.bc.ca/Files/86f97f4a-ca97-44b8-83ca-7081b1fa8a04/InfolineSkiinginWhistler.pdf (accessed in March 2014)29or willing, however that would be a bit leaning toward being a bit judgemental...785.2. Forest management changes due to the shiftto know how to behave on a forestry road30 and can recognize the signsshowing active logging. Tourists on the other hand may not recognize theindications of active logging, and the sheer number of people in the forestmay in itself cause problems. Some of these problems are because the roadsare located on public land and open to the public:“Operationaly there would be [an effect of] increased traffic whichis a consideration because it is public roads.” [Hemlock Valley,RPFs]As a side note, the boundary expansion is a concern only when the landbase is crown land. In the case of Mount Washington, the extent of theproperty limits the size of the land base. From the perspective of BC Parks:“The only way the boundaries would change would be to increasethe size of the park. There is too much public history withthe park since its creation [...] It is the first provincial park ofBC (1911) and there are a lot of people that support the parkand believe that it should be maintained as wilderness and thatit should be increased in size and not decreased ever.” [MountWashington, BC park staff]Visual quality as the prime value for management,communication ensuesThere is evidence within the case studies that the values of forest man-agement have changed or are seen to be bound to change due to the shifttowards recreation and aesthetics as the prime, if not sole, value.First of all, as demonstrated in the following quotes, the fact that thereis no snow both protecting the landscape and hiding its scars makes a bigdifference.“One of the interesting effects is that when resorts were not openfor the summer they were not interested in what the place lookedlike, because it was covered in snow. Now that we are open forsummer we have to look better: grass seeding, cleaning out...[...] I think it was a real shift when people could see what theseplaces looked like in the summertime.” [Mount Washington]30although few are equipped with two-way radios and this opinion is not shared by someof the professionals amongst my acquaintances.795.2. Forest management changes due to the shift“Is it a function of us transiting to a summer resort? Absolutely,because the stakes are higher now. If we were just a winter resortit would be less of a concern because the clear cuts don’t look sobad when they have snow on them.” [Whistler]It is evident that the behaviour of the people/visitors changes due toseasonality. During the winter, they are less focused on nature and more onrecreation: their activities are more adrenaline focused. During the sum-mer, the pace is slower for a larger amount of people and there is moreemphasis on looking at the surroundings. That is not to say that there areno adrenaline-focused summer activities: downhill mountain biking, rock-climbing, etc. are examples. However, as quoted earlier, it is believed that:“skiers are actors of our environment but summer visitors are spectators ofthe environment, far more aware of the ecology because it is in their face.”This idea is expanded in the following comment:“I think there is more people, residents and visitors, looking atthe valley and the slopes, because of the shift. They look attheir surroundings more, and more critically perhaps becausethe weather is better. There is no fog going down so you can seebetter what is going on on the sides of the mountain. I thinkin that sense that the shift has given people a better perspec-tive about what is going on there, at least what they can seeof the forest. [...] There are more people coming here now forthe summer and they would be more aware of the ecology andthe environment than a lot of people coming for the winter.”[Whistler]So the visual quality and the natural environment are really seen asproducts sold by the resorts, mainly in the summer, which lead to a verystrong incentive to have them preserved. This does not necessarily implythat it is preserved from an ecological and environmental perspective butthat it is preserved to match the expectations and perceptions of the visitors.It is known that there is a significant difference between what people thinkis a healthy and beautiful nature scene and the reality. As a respondentfrom Sun Peaks observed:“Obviously we have to have forest because of the aesthetic andthat aesthetic is part of what we sell. So if the whole thing wasto burn down or to become terribly diseased and all fell down...So we have to manage for that, so forest health is one.” [SunPeaks]805.2. Forest management changes due to the shiftIn the case of Hemlock Valley, the biggest impact of a shift to year-round recreational use would be an increase of the land base designated forrecreation use, following the resort owner’s master plan.“[you saw] the new logging on the way up to the resort: theylogged all the way to the front door so to speak. I don’t thinkthat logging and outdoor recreation go hand in hand that well.They should restrict it at least in the area of the lease and I knowhe [the resort’s owner] has applied for a lot more land with thenew lease. It is 442 hectares right now and I think the masterplan is 4,000 hectares and restricting logging.” [Hemlock Valley]The fact that the forest is an asset from a visual perspective, not onlyon the leased land but also in the complete visual corridor (i.e. access to theresort, viewscape from the top of the hills, etc.) implies that logging withvisual values forefront is critical. To have control over this aspect, Whistlerapplied and obtained a community forest and the three other studied re-sorts are trying to have as much communication as possible with loggingcompanies active in the area. So one of the main benefits of the shift couldbe more communication with the logging companies actively working inthe surrounding forest. In Hemlock Valley, despite what the interviewedcompany says, the community feels that is not adequately consulted. Theforestry company has recognized this and if the resort were to operate year-round (however unlikely), the company knows that there would be a greaterneed for consultation. They assert that they already do a lot of consulta-tion but that is contradicted by the strong feelings expressed by membersof the community, especially concerning a recent cut block on the road tothe resort. Such problems may also occur because the community is notorganized or big enough to voice its concerns.The two following quotes show the discrepancy of views in the case ofconsultation between community and forestry companies, about the recentcut block on the road to the resort in Hemlock Valley:“I do not think we get a lot of a say in that [sigh] because weare just not big enough. We don’t carry big enough clout. Likeall the logging on the side of the road coming up here, we didn’tknow about it until it was done. So we drove up one day andit was like Oh my God, what happened!’ Nobody talked tous, nobody said anything, and if they had we would have saidHey, fill your boots, go ahead log but leave some trees along the815.2. Forest management changes due to the shiftroad!’ My God, they left like two trees! [...] Last summer we hadfriends visiting, and we’ve gotten used to seeing the trees gone,they came up and went Oh my God, what happened?’ Really,could you not stop it?’ and I went: It was done!’ When thoseboys go in and start logging, it is DONE!” [Hemlock Valley, ayear-round resident]“It is probably getting involved more with the public, we doquite a bit now but... Mountain biking clubs and all will wantyou to work around their trails so, yes, more interaction with thepublic. [...] We deal with mountain bike and ATV and handg-liding groups and all special interest groups that are concernedabout management of species and things of that nature... Wetake these things into consideration.” [Hemlock Valley, RPFs]5.2.2 Community-based forestry in relation to the shiftOne of the unique features of the situation in Whistler is the presence of acommunity forest (the Cheakamus Community Forest, described in chapter3). As a respondent observed:“Certainly the way the community forest is managed, the waywe do the harvesting: no big clear cut, no clear cut at all, justsmall blocks, lots of retention, visuals are very important... Andit is all because of the tourists.” [Whistler]It is unclear if the shift directly influenced the granting of the CCF li-cense. Six participants specifically asserted a causal link between the shiftand the granting of the CCF. There is clearly a link as the CCF gave morecontrol over logging practices to the municipality, and as seen in the quote,nobody believes that the municipality is in the logging business or that itshould be (i.e. the CCF removed decision-making about the style of harvest-ing from the hands of the government). The weight that the municipality(and community) of Whistler carries economically, and in terms of media in-fluence, undoubtedly played a role in the granting of the CCF. Historically,many of the individuals involved in gaining acceptance of recreation as avalid form of land use and having it included in land management bylawswere based or associated with the Whistler community..I believe that the CCF is, at the moment, a double-edged sword. On theone hand, it allows the municipality greater control over where logging is825.2. Forest management changes due to the shiftgoing to occur but the RMOW is only one of three partners in the CCF andthe other two partners, the Lil’wat and Squamish First Nations, also havevested interests in the forests that may not be fully aligned with the inter-ests of the RMOW. On the other hand, the AAC, which is still determinedby government, and the financing of the operations coming from the sale oflogs, forces by law the partners to actively log 20,000 cubic metres annually,which is about 40% of what would likely be harvested in the absence of acommunity forest and resort.That said, the community forest is very important as a tool and hasallowed the partners to be involved in a different kind of forestry, one thatis not solely based on the extraction of timber nor solely based on preserva-tion, as a national or provincial park would be. One of the problems is thatthe second growth stands on the land base are not yet ready for harvestingand, therefore, some old-growth forest needs to be cut in order to meet theAAC and to provide enough money for operations. This has caused someturmoil in the community and some interviewees have even linked it to thechange of government in the 2011 municipal elections. My personal expe-rience, attending a heated CCF open house during the election campaign,tends to corroborate this view.As indicated in the following quotation, it is thought that the issues overAAC and management costs will resolve themselves when the second growthtimber becomes available:“The community forest is even better because it’s got more sayon what is happening, it’s just growing right now. Because thereis not much they can do on income because there is very littleold-growth for them. They will solve their problems in about 5or 10 years when the excellent plantations, which are not old-growth but very good commercial plantations up the Callaghan[valley] come on stream. Then the community forest will havethe funds to do the job they should do which is ensure that theroads stay accessible, the ones that are important, the trails aremaintained, that the commercial recreation operators must dotheir share, which they have not done in the past...” [Whistler]The management costs are higher for the CCF because they are usingEcosystem-Based Management (EBM) as the core planning tool for forestmanagement. It is mostly multi-use management and all targeted to thetourism business, even when performing harvesting operations. This reflects835.2. Forest management changes due to the shiftthe values of the partners but is also a necessary process to become certifiedby the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC). The CCF website defines EBMas: “Essentially, EBM acknowledges environments holistically, examiningecological systems in terms of geography, flora and fauna, economics andculture.” Managing the forest following an EBM plan is more expensive butas a Whistler respondent observed, the values are in tune with those of thecommunity:“I think that because we are a year round resort there is moreimpetus to try that EBM plan because there are tons of peoplehere in the summer and they are crawling all over these valleysso it is in our best interest as a resort. If you want to cut it downto the economics, to make sure that those roads are maintainedand that the harvesting is at a minimum and that the impacton the landbase is as friendly as possible. The whole silvicultureplan of the CCF is small openings, leaving trees behind, havingmore old-growth areas protected, etc. If people were not usingthe back country around here to the extent they do why bother,because nobody is going to see it.” [Whistler]For instance the zone labelled as Fee03 31 comprises a land base provid-ing 7882 cubic metres of timber and has been set as 25 openings rangingfrom 0.1 to 1.4 hectares (ha) with low retention and multiple entry shelter-wood. Moreover, the roads for accessing timber are re-used from existingroads and when new roads need to be created they are created with theirrecreational use in mind. The roads are laid out in order to create a loopfor recreationists (such as hikers or mountain bikers) so as to ensure thatthe roads will be kept in good condition by making them very attractive forusers. Over the three years of operations, the forestry company created morethan 65 openings, each less than 2 ha. However, the size of the openingsand the composition of the forest (mostly Western Hemlock and BalsamFir (for instance BaHw or BaHwFd(Cw) on the map in Figure 5.2), lateseral species) makes for good natural regeneration and does not necessitateplanting.Another example of a road designed for both timber extraction and recre-ational use is at the end of the Callaghan Valley. It is described below:“At the bottom of the Callaghan valley there is an area in the feecompartment which is on the Blackcomb Snowmobile recreation31file: CCF F03 Access LP map 2012-12-071.pdf845.2. Forest management changes due to the shiftFigure 5.2: Map of zone F03, showing multiple small openingstenure, T and the owner have been working together to developwhat the road system looks like and put it in a series of loopsso that S can use it afterwards as a beginner snowmobile andATV area for his clients. So it is definitely influencing how thecommunity forest does its work.” [Whistler]This type of management comes with a higher cost. The operatingcontractor determined that his Forestry and Engineering (F&E) costs werearound Can$ 4 to 5 per cubic metre whereas they would usually be aroundCan$ 3 per cubic metre for “normal” operations.The original plan for the CCF and the concept of sustainability for thewood industry also envisions local use of the wood and value-added woodproducts. As described by one of the participants:“It was one of the objectives of the community forest, maybenot using the wood for woodworking but making canoes, cedarmasks and clothing, basket weaving... And then there is thenon-timber forest products. All of those things were in the filewhen we did the community forest plan.” [Whistler]The community forest has not reached this point yet but some studieshave been undertaken on selling carbon credits. It is beyond the scope of855.2. Forest management changes due to the shiftthis study to elaborate on this aspect32 but the fact that such studies arebeing conducted shows a willingness to manage the forest differently andwith aesthetic and recreation values always in mind.An interesting side effect of the CCF is that it provides an easily recog-nisable and approachable face to the logging industry. As one participantsaid:“[...] the fact that we have the community forest means thatthere are some local people to point fingers at, so some morepeople would be more active about it.” [Whistler]Consequently, it could be argued that the CCF provides a way to increasecommunity engagement. Having witnessed an open house (albeit again inthe particular context of the election campaign), I can concur.Most of the information about the value of the CCF comes from intervie-wees in the community, from the available documentation on their websiteand from my own experience, although even outside of Whistler the benefitsof having a community forest are recognized. In interviews in other commu-nities, I sought people’s opinions about the actual effects of a communityforest and whether it would be possible for their community to obtain sucha license. However, Whistler is unique because of its size, its history andneighbouring communities. The main purpose of the CCF is still widelyunderstood to be a way to have some sort of control over the asset whichrepresents the forest from a visual perspective, as pointed out from SunPeaks:“However, without a community forest you can still have somekind of community forest because forestry companies today re-spect that the way they manage the forest around a ski resortis different than the way they might manage the next mountainup the valley. So communication and information exchange isthere and it will probably lead to a more sane management ofthe forest. And I am sure that the Whistler community forestwas a way of getting management control a little bit, becausenobody trusted forestry at the time. The advantage of the com-munity forest is that you can change the boundaries, you don’t32And I do not really understand how the CCF can sell carbon credits to the RMOW,that seems a lot like a conflict of interest or worse to me...865.2. Forest management changes due to the shifthave to have parameters and environmental control, you canhave stricter environmental control, stricter logging practices,your cutting blocks may be a lot smaller... But I think you canachieve the same thing just by having good communication withthe industry.” [Sun Peaks]Further figures from the CCF annual report (excerpt, courtesy of theCCF) are shown in Table 5.1 and show the amount of logging, the amountof replanting but also the growing number of stakeholders on the land baseand some numbers about consultation.Table 5.1: Monitoring report for the CCF in 2013.Monitoring report 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013Area logged (ha) 11 16 38 22 35Volume logged (m3) 873 2366 15,963 7195 23,363Area reforested (ha) 0 15 4.8 18 35Stakeholders 18 28 31 31 35Roads maintained (Km) 0 12 8.9 8.8 ??Public Meetings 4 5 4 3 3Employment person months 42 19 62Trees planted 8,800 12,800 30,400 17,600 28,000Public inquiries 15 250+ 12 10 5The amount of stakeholder increase is interesting. By looking closelyinto which type of stakeholder gets on-board at later dates maybe a corre-lation with the quality of life and thereby a diversification of points of viewcould be drawn. Most of the latter additions to the stakeholders’ list are ofvery varied backgrounds: carbon credit management, environmental groups,commercial recreations, etc.To conclude the discussion on the CCF and community-based forestry,there is a clear link between the granting of the CCF to a partnership withstrong tourism values and the shift. Indeed, by becoming a year-round“world class” destination Whistler became a powerful player in negotiationswith the government. Exploring new management practices became easierbecause of the community’s motivation to do so, both because it made senseeconomically with visuals as the prime asset and because the people involvedwere in an appropriate state of mind due to their life style in the community.875.2. Forest management changes due to the shiftAs one of the participants said “I might be a bit biased because I am partof the stewardship gig.” Indeed...5.2.3 Logging roads as a shared assetThere was agreement in all the case study communities that the roads, andparticularly forest service roads and/or logging roads, are an extremely im-portant issue. Some of these roads are intensely used for recreation. Forinstance recent statistics (provided by the Squamish regional district, De-partment of Service Roads Management) show that the forest service road tothe Cheakamus lake trailhead was used an average of 4,655 times/month33with a peak of 9,282 times in July 2013. This represents the number ofvehicle passages as the device used to provide the data is a magnetic sensorand does not show hikers or mountain bikers. It is also uncertain whetherit would pick up a quad or a dirt bike. Even given these limitations, in July2013 there was an average of 300 vehicles per day.Most of the roads originate from historical logging. An example of theimportance of this legacy in Whistler in relation to access to recreation sites,is provided in this quote from a commercial recreation company:“For us we got really lucky because we are in the forest butwe are so close to the village that we are only on a reactivatedlogging road for about 800 metres and that is due to a naturaldisaster that happened in 1991: the Fitzsimmons river had alandslide and it dammed up the creek. Eventually it burst andflooded the village so they reactivated that portion of the loggingroad to be able to manage that landslide. So we were lucky tohave the use of that road, we didn’t have to start our eco toursby building a road or reactivating a road... But without loggingthere wouldn’t have been a road in there.” [Whistler, commercialrecreation company]The following quote shows the importance of logging roads to modernrecreation practices, specifically mountain biking and therefore to some ex-tent to the shift in activity discussed in section 5.1.2:“With that logging there was all those roads being there, thenthere was the advent of the mountain bike that happened. Well,I think that Whistler was perfectly positioned: the terrain, the33over the months of July to December 2013885.2. Forest management changes due to the shiftinfrastructure (i.e. logging roads), so the word got out ’hey cometo Whistler there is great mountain biking.’ For what was moun-tain biking back then: no shocks, you were lucky to have 2 inchtires and bikes were heavier than they are now. So logging roadswith their grades and relative smoothness made ideal opportu-nities.” [Whistler]Almost everybody agrees that recreationists have a sense of entitlementabout the use of logging roads to access sites. Everybody has one anecdoteor another based on the use of logging roads and many recognize the legacyof the logging industry. However, very few have any idea of the actual costof maintaining such a road or who should be responsible for it once timberharvesting is done. “Decommissioning” and “deactivation” are part of thevocabulary of the people interviewed but when it comes to maintenance theusual pronoun used is “they” with little knowledge about who “they” ex-actly are.The number of commercial recreation companies doing business duringthe summer has increased dramatically since the shift. There are about 80different commercial recreation companies operating in Whistler, all withoverlapping tenures. This results in conflicts between forest stakeholders,mostly related to visual impacts when interacting with the CCF, but alsowithin the commercial recreation companies’ group itself for access rights.However, the examples given for the type of road management and oper-ations done by the CCF show a will to collaborate with the commercialrecreation companies. The quote presented earlier about an increase in traf-fic in the Hemlock Valley case study indicates that there is a direct conflictin the case of a working forest. It would be only fair that maintenancecosts be shared by municipalities (if any), commercial recreation companies,logging companies (or the community forest), and maybe the provincial gov-ernment but the facts indicate that there is a reliance on government (localand provincial) and logging companies to do the maintenance. The issue ofmanaging these roads for multi-use is a conundrum faced by any tourism-based community, whether they are within the scope of this study or notand whether they are affected by the shift or not. Moreover, the access issueis not only a summer issue as winter activities such as snowmobiling, snow-shoeing, crosscountry skiing, etc. also make use of these roads. Ultimately,it is about the notion of carrying capacity:“Carrying capacity is the key word here. The more we ignore itthe more degraded our roads and trails will become.” [Whistler]895.3. Environmental impacts and their mitigation in relation to the shiftThat being said, the use of logging roads for recreation is nothing new,regardless of location or the type of land: private or public, as this MountWashington respondent observes:“While driving up the mountain we are using Strathcona Park-way, people often stop at certain safe places on that route andjust randomly start hiking in what we refer to as the resourceareas, which is a designation in our planning bylaws but is pri-vately owned.” [Mount Washington]5.2.4 ConclusionIt is unclear whether there is consensus that forest management practiceshave changed significantly due to the shift. It is clear, however, that forestmanagement has been evolving in Canada (and BC) and that the shift hadan impact at least in the involvement of community residents and the publicfrom a nature perception perspective. The boundary expansion hypothesisis supported by the evidence and there have been impacts on forest man-agement practices because of the number of recreationists using the forestand because a greater number of stakeholders involved with the land baseinduces more involvement and more collaboration. The CCF example showsa change in forestry practices due to the shift, with a higher propensity forvisual quality and recreational use management. Lastly, the use of forestryroads is an issue that needs to be taken into account, as use has increasedas a result of the shift.5.3 Environmental impacts and their mitigationin relation to the shiftIt is probably an oxymoron to state that development to the level of whatis implied by a successful shift is going to be beneficial for the environment.Putting more people (and the figure here is counted in millions) in natureis basically destroying nature one way or another. However, I believe thathuman development is inevitable, that impacts can be mitigated and thatit is better to at least help to do things properly rather than simply shakingone’s head in exasperation. Whistler, with its millions of visitors, cannotpreserve the environment the same way that a reserve can do, or even anational or regional park. But maybe it can mitigate its impacts and use itsfame to provide an example of good stewardship, perhaps by exceeding theneeds of the regulatory environment and by raising awareness about issues905.3. Environmental impacts and their mitigation in relation to the shiftsuch as climate change, the beauty of nature and the need for preservation.An example of this is the provision of wildlife information signs on the mainBlackcomb Mountain chairlift. This section examines impact mitigation indetail.One argument is that in each of the four case studies, the area was notpreviously untouched by humanity. Each formerly hosted forestry activitiesand, in some cases, the first lifts were built taking advantage of existingclear cuts. The average demographic of my sample makes it clear thatalmost everybody recognizes the legacy of the forestry industry. It seemsthat there is nothing a tourist can do, short of torching a whole valley, whichcould happen, that hasn’t been done a thousand fold by loggers in the past,as voiced by a respondent in Hemlock Valley resort:“So the impact from a tourist going out for a hike or mountainbiking or whatever will not be the same than if you were in anactual pristine area untouched by humanity. There is not a lotof damage that you can do that a logger has not already done4 or 5 times in the past 100 years. So this is probably a primearea if you were to say ’where can we put 5,000 hikers/year wecan send them to the Northern end of Vancouver Island or tothe North-East side of BC or to Hemlock...’ The environmentalimpact would be less here simply by virtue of the way thingsare.” [Hemlock Valley]However, as discussed in the previous section, there have been changesto the regulations and forest practices and today forestry is a lot moresensitive than in the past. Secondly, we need to consider the numbers: amillion tourists and the development necessary to accommodate them willnot go hand in hand with ecosystem regeneration (natural or not). So acritical notion is carrying capacity. As one participant in Whistler said:“We do have a carrying capacity and once it goes over there willbe impacts for sure.” [Whistler]The shift is also obviously detrimental because in summer, people comein direct contact with the land, whereas in winter there is a protective coverof snow. Snow compaction is a potential issue, as is the generation of ar-tificial snow, but snowmobiles have less impact on the soil than quads orATVs. Even so, all machinery in use at the resorts has a perceptible effect onwildlife and, generally, the environment regardless of the season [Stokowski915.3. Environmental impacts and their mitigation in relation to the shiftand LaPointe, 2000]. An in-depth discussion of the motorized versus non-motorized recreation conflict is outside the scope of this thesis. The twofollowing quotes from Sun Peaks and Whistler reveal the perception of thesnow protective cover:“I would say that the biggest difference is the impact that thetraffic has on ground instead of five feet above the ground onsnow.” [Sun Peaks]“One of the beautiful things about winter is the snow: you canride snowmobiles for hours and hours and you haven’t touch theground. There is a layer of protection. There is a compactionissue but because there is relatively few people on such a massiveland base...” [Whistler]In the next subsections the value of using a successful shift as an ex-ample for raising awareness is discussed, together with the impact of publicscrutiny. I then examine the notion of density, limits to growth and thehoney pot concept. Finally I look at the impact of the shift on stewardshipin relation to government regulations.Most of the quotes and findings in this section relate to Whistler andSun Peaks as these two communities are the only ones that have undergonea successful shift. It was difficult for participants from the other two com-munities to envision what could happen. Moreover, the principal findingsrevolve around the notion of an increase of nature perception amongst res-idents of a shifted community and tourists. This is not something which isintuitive and it is therefore not surprising that participants in non-shiftedresorts had little information on this.5.3.1 Communities’ and tourists’ perceptions of naturechanges due to the shiftFrom the community point of view: scrutiny towardsself-regulationA community that is modified by performing the shift has a tendency tobe quite environmentally friendly. Residents care strongly about the placethey live in and, as there are economic benefits and comfort arising from asuccessful shift, they can focus efforts in trying to behave in an environmen-tally friendly manner instead of just trying to make it to the next day. This925.3. Environmental impacts and their mitigation in relation to the shiftargument can induce smiling, especially in Whistler which is seen as a verywealthy community. However, and this is debated in chapter 5.4, a middleclass has certainly emerged that could be related to the shift and it is thiscategory of people that is mostly represented in my sampling base. This isclearly indicated by a (young) resident of Whistler:“The community here is very focused on nature and the envi-ronment and preserving. It may come back to the whole basicneeds stuff: we are a wealthy town even if not everybody makesa ton of money but we are very content in our lives so we areable to focus on the environment. [...] Most people get that it iscritical to our economy. Clear cutting would just be a disasterbecause people come here for the outdoors and the wilderness.”[Whistler]Similarly, the community strength that grows out of being a stable year-round resort needs to be brought to another level of stewardship by fosteringenvironmental groups. Importantly, as Inglehart [1990] proposes, there is achange of values from materialism to post-materialism that derives from araise in quality of life allowing for environmental activism to become moreof a priority. When the basic needs are fulfilled people can focus on art,culture, recreation, and ecological activism. This seems to be contradictedin a global view by Dunlap and Mertig [1995], but I think it is still a validpoint in the case of this research, i.e. ski resorts in BC. It is expressed bythis example from a member of such an interest group in Whistler:“For instance at a WORCA [Whistler Offroad Cycling Associa-tion] event I have often 25 people joining me every second Tues-day night with our headlights to do restoration work in the valleyfor local NGO groups, do riparian planting, clean up streams.That’s a backbone, people show up, year after year, and do thatkind of work... And a four seasons resort is an imperative tobuild that.” [Whistler]A shift induces growth, both economically and in the size of the com-munity34. This is both a blessing and a curse. On the upside the growth ofthe studied resort communities brings a higher level of care, as has just beenstated, and the growth of resources and “fame” brings both financial means34As has been pointed out by one of my wise supervisors, such a statement could implythat Chinese and Indian megacites should be the most caring in the world. Obviously itapplies to resort communities in BC, Canada...935.3. Environmental impacts and their mitigation in relation to the shiftand visibility. This, in turn, leads to greater levels of both internal andexternal scrutiny, as has been expressed by a participant from Sun Peaksresort, who concluded that it creates self-regulation leading to a higher levelof land management:“A year round resort has more resources, more population, morepeople watching. On the one hand the environmental impactmay be greater but on the other hand the watchfulness or thedesire to do things in an environmentally sensitive manner goesup.” [Sun Peaks]The scrutiny and self-regulation concept does not only apply to resi-dents (and potentially visitors) but also to involved stakeholder groups. Inparticular, it is in the best interests of commercial recreation companies toensure that what is considered a pristine environment is preserved. It isinteresting to see that despite the situation seemingly being a classic case of“Tragedy of the Commons”, the endpoint proposed by Hardin [1968] is notbeing reached. Instead, it is more like the endpoints suggested by Ostrom,Walker, and Gardner [1992] and Ostrom [1999], which ties with the theoryof resilience. Of particular interest are empirical studies, reviewed in Ostrom[1999], showing local groups of resource users who cope with common-poolresources; often used examples are fisheries, metropolitan areas, irrigationsystems or watersheds, and forests. Indeed, one respondent from Whistlermentioned the number of commercial companies sharing the same land base,or having overlapping tenures, and sharing the same perceptions of nature.He said:“[The number of commercial recreation companies sharing theland] manages those things that we don’t see. There are peopleout there that are not government’s employees catching peoplefor making a mess, it is a self regulation process. They watcheach other and then they watch the bad guys coming in... I thinkit’s good.” [Whistler]Some other unrecorded conversations that I had with different membersof the resort seem to corroborate this statement, particularly the issue ofroad maintenance in collaboration with the municipality and the CCF. Evenif the issue is far from being solved the consensus tends towards an adequatemanagement of the “commons” (i.e. the roads) with self-regulation imposedby the sharing the land base.945.3. Environmental impacts and their mitigation in relation to the shiftAnother aspect is that, as shown in an earlier section, a vocal and activecommunity is necessary to build the momentum and strength to performthe shift successfully. In most cases there will be a part of the communitythat feels a strong connection to nature and the environment, since this isone of the reasons to be living in the community. This leads to involvementat various levels and can keep development and poor practices in line. Onevery long time resident of Whistler humorously mentions:“We have a very small very vocal community which I call thegreen mafia who try to preserve our natural environment. I be-lieve that in many ways they have brought some better planningto the whole project.” [Whistler]This quote illustrates very well many of the mechanisms at play in sucha community. I would argue that it is a beneficial aspect of the shift. Onthe other hand, and along similar lines, politically or economically influ-ential individuals with properties in the community could have an impacton the developments of the resorts, even if their official influence shouldnot be expressed more than by their voting rights as second-home owner.This possibility is not based on any substantial evidence, but should not bediscarded.From the tourists point of view: nature perception and raising ofawarenessFrom the visitors’ point of view, there seems to have been a shift in theway that the resorts are perceived, and the same quote from a Whistlerparticipant about people being more like spectators during the summer isrepeated:“In the summer visitors are more spectators than actors [...],they want to know about the environment and to connect withthe local environment. And part of our story is to put our guestsin some of the most aesthetically naturally beautiful places butalso to showcase our story on how we are doing our best to keepit that way. So it takes you to a deeper level of interaction withguests, which is part of the brand, the culture... It does go deeperbecause of summer. The guest is closer to the impacts but alsothe positive on how we manage.” [Whistler]With a resort being a primarily commercial venture, this shift is used asadvertising to bring in more customers, but it also leads to a global increase955.3. Environmental impacts and their mitigation in relation to the shiftin awareness. This was proposed by a participant from Sun Peaks, whonoticed that people were surprised by the difference between summer andwinter in terms of visual landscape:“When people usually come in the summer in a ski resort theyoften say: ’Oh, that’s what it looks like in the summer’ sort ofsuggesting they never thought about it. So it is very much apositive in the awareness of people.” [Sun Peaks]The increase in awareness that ensues can be used as an educationaltool but is also related to the idea of scrutiny and self-regulation. With therise of Internet-based social media and availability of technologies, such asdigital cameras and mobile devices, it is increasingly easy to share evidenceof inappropriate behaviour with social groups, or the world. This ties in withthe role of social media in relation to activism which has been extensivelystudied, especially recently with the Arabic revolutions (and some othermore current ones). The impact on environmental activism has also beenstudied [Pickerill, 2003]. De Jong [2013, pg.90] describes actions taken byWhistler-Blackcomb using social media technology as a tool for engagement:“A Facebook page and twitter for ‘every step counts’ could generate anongoing dialogue for current staff, those who leave, and the general public.This platform can track and build capacity with all past and current staffwho get involved in leading change in their communities.” Other quotes fromSun Peaks further demonstrate this:“User scrutiny is very clever because it is like social media in away. The more people that are there in today’s world, if youare doing something wrong in the resort they will tell you andeveryone else what is going on. So there is something like aself-regulating mechanism.” [Sun Peaks]“Probably the biggest change is the mentality of the forestryadministration because [having] more people going around putspressure and the public is not shy complaining when they see badforest practices. And the expectations today are much higherthan even 15 years ago.” [Sun Peaks]The value of a good example...By capitalizing on both the higher level of stewardship induced by scrutinyand self-regulation and the awareness that could be raised amongst the pub-lic during summer, one can argue that a very strong benefit of a resort having965.3. Environmental impacts and their mitigation in relation to the shiftsuccessfully shifted to a year-round business lies in its value as an exampleof good practices.For instance, Whistler is renowned as a “world class” destination resortfor downhill mountain biking and one of the best known downhill mountainbiking park designers in the world is a long-time resident of Whistler35 andwas heavily involved in the creation of its park. However many mistakeswere made at the beginning, as stated with the following quote:“We hammered our watershed when we did our first downhillmountain bike trails, they were not done well at all. Now I lookat what the guys do and it is a whole new era of how to stopputting sediments in creeks. And that influences all the othermountain biking parks in the world because everybody is lookingat us and asking: ’how do you do this now?’ So we have thatopportunity to lead by example.” [Whistler]Mountain biking is a very important part of performing a shift to ayear-round resort. When Whistler made its shift, mountain biking was inits infancy, as was the technology (both of the bikes and the infrastructure).These have now developed, so a resort wanting to make a shift today couldlook at how it was done in Whistler. Whistler, essentially, has set the stan-dards, not just for British Columbia, but globally.On a side note, in the case of Mount Washington, some summer activityin the resort is seen as beneficial for Strathcona Park, as its proximity willbring more people in and they will become more aware of the park. One ofthe participants from the Mount Washington resort case study stated:“Any increase that way [towards more summer activities] is goingto benefit in the long run with BC parks because people comingto the park and hiking are going to want to protect the parkmore...” [Mount Washington]5.3.2 Anti-sprawl and densificationOne interviewee compared Whistler to the Vancouver aquarium:35Sadly I could not interview him during my main sampling session because he wasin Sweden designing a park, and my later efforts to meet were all unsuccessful so ourexchanges were limited to emails.975.3. Environmental impacts and their mitigation in relation to the shift“It is like the Vancouver aquarium, it sucks for the whale beingthere but it is a great teaching tool... So you need to make it anexperience which is valuable enough but also so people are notable to damage it... It is not that natural because of all thosepeople but it is natural enough for them to get an appreciation.It is sacrificing one place so that they appreciate and protect thereally good places.” [Whistler]This quote is quite curious, but it illustrates the concept of the “honey pot”.Even if people have a tendency to wander further away from the resorts dur-ing the summer because that is the nature of the activities (hiking, mountainbiking, etc.), the vast majority will not stray far from the high density zone.For instance, Lost Lake in Whistler is the furthest “wilderness” location that90% of the visitors will reach. So the shift does not really seem to encourageflows of people outside of identified high density locations (and sometimescalled recreation area boundaries).Keeping the density and preventing sprawl is considered by a respondentfrom Whistler to be the biggest impact that the community has had on theland. He stated:“I think it was one of the most powerful things that we did tomanage growth, that downzoning.” [Whistler]The downzoning referred to here is when the municipality increased theminimum lot size from 20 acres to 100 acres. Some people bought 20 acrelots and put only one, very expensive, house on a parcel, which was un-expected at the time. The first Can$ 1 million house is believed to haveappeared around 1990 and houses in the Can$ 5 to 10 million range startedto be constructed around 2000. In Whistler, each lot is linked to a sin-gle building. By increasing the lot size and, therefore, the price of a lot,the density was increased because lots were subdivided while keeping thesame number of bed units. A single person would no longer be able buya lot and build only one house on it but rather a hotel or a set of housessmall. This is not directly linked to the shift but rather to the success ofthe resort. However, I would argue that the shift played a significant role inthat success. Downzoning has been proven to be an important tool to limitexpansion. Interestingly a search for the keyword “downzoning” providedaccess to a newspaper from January 1983, The Sunshine Coast News, wherea certain Mr. Murphy expresses his total disagreement with the concept:“I am against downzoning in principle [...] People moving here should have985.3. Environmental impacts and their mitigation in relation to the shiftthe right to buy what they like”36. Most probably there was not an issueto the extent of the one faced by Whistler. More newspaper articles acrossthe province can be found showing the controversy of the concept. One ofthe main arguments is that downzoning affects the timing of developmentbut not ultimately the densities. It seems to have worked in Whistler, asstudied in Gill and Williams [2011].In Hemlock Valley, one of the interviewees pondered about the impactthat the shift would have on the environment and stated:“ATVs, bikers, horseback riders, we are all on trails, we do notgo into the forest at all, so we’re all on once upon a time forestservice roads. I do not think there would be much impact atall.” [Hemlock Valley]However, this seems to reflect a numbers issue again, namely the carryingcapacity. Simply stating that people will stay on trails is one aspect of thetourism business. Control of the development of the land from a real estatepoint of view is critical. As another participant from Whistler asserted:“So yes, we have allowed a lot of impact but without the control,without the philosophy about respect and stewardship of theland this would look a lot different.” [Whistler]5.3.3 Exceeding government regulationsThe product sold by a year-round mountain resort goes beyond adrenalineand is more focused on nature, wilderness, and the beauty of a pristineenvironment. And this is a direct consequence of the shift as there is a sig-nificant difference in visitor’s expectations from winter to summer, as shownabove. Whistler-Blackcomb heavily invests in sustainability: “The sustain-ability strategy at Whistler Blackcomb is twofold: 1) Prove the businesscase for meaningful resource conservation and carbon reduction. 2) Compelthe entire tourism sector to do the same.” [De Jong, 2013] Another exampleof the extent to which resort managers are thinking about this is describedin this quote from a Whistler resident:“Let’s say the mountain [Whistler-Blackcomb company] now wantsto go into ATVing or to expand their mountain bike network, I36http://historicalnewspapers.library.ubc.ca/view/collection/coastnews/date/1983-01-17 (accessed in March 2014)995.3. Environmental impacts and their mitigation in relation to the shiftthink they made a concerted effort to do it properly. When yougo up [name of one particular lift] there is no trails off to theleft, and they’ve done that on purpose to try and maintain thathabitat, bear or marmot or whatever it may be. Everything thatis developed is off to the right, so I think the mountain is fairlyconscious of where they are concentrating their activity. So thatthere is good recreational experience for the adrenaline junkiesbut the people who are there for sightseeing are still apt to seea form of wildlife...” [Whistler]Resort management or communities put a lot of effort into fulfilling cus-tomers’ expectations and I would argue that this leads to a level of steward-ship that well exceeds the government standards. For instance one of theSun Peaks respondents asserted that they have a very good managementplan in relation to the environment, hinting at a very high level of priorityfor environmental concern:“The key here is a good plan well executed. The other resorts Ican think of they have more an ad hoc plan, they do this and thenthat and there is no cohesion to it and I think that there is morerisks that way to run into some detriment to the environment.”[Sun Peaks]Moreover, the Sun Peaks resort company chose to use the ISO 14001certification. This was not an effect of the shift but reflected a need forvisibility and for compliance with regulations. The reason for the ISO cer-tification was to have an external body as a guarantee of legitimacy. Thesame respondent explained:“We decided to go with ISO 14001 because of the importanceof that third party auditing but [Whistler] went to what somepeople may refer to as green washing techniques. We think that3rd party auditing is the way to go. The auditors hold your feetto the fire in terms of continuous improvement, etc. and we tryto put on the website what it is.” [Sun Peaks]As stated in the previous quote Whistler chose another way37 and createdthe Whistler 2020 initiative. A resident from Whistler directly links theinitiative to the shift:37Which I will refrain from qualifying of “green washing” myself for lack of evidence.However, it seems that the initiative is stalling at the moment, one cannot find data after2010 on the website http://www.whistler2020.ca/1005.3. Environmental impacts and their mitigation in relation to the shift“You didn’t really see the Whistler sustainability council or theWhistler 2020 [initiative] happen before the shift happened. Thesethings came in only recently, in the last 10 years, and the com-munity really focus on those things and before that it wasn’t onanybody’s radar... The shift and the fact that people are hereall year round have put pressure on our forest and force us todo things sustainably or we are going to erode the experience weare providing.” [Whistler]This clearly shows the relationship between the shift and the need to pre-serve what tourists come for and which has been recognized as the forests,or more broadly the environment. For instance, the alpine areas are wellsought after and are above tree line. It also shows a need for communicationand the use of environmental stewardship as a marketing tool.However, environmental concerns are not only dealt with at the resortlevel. There are a number of government regulations that exist in order topreserve the environment in BC (and everywhere else in the world, albeitto various levels and standards), whether it is for a new development or forthe forest industry, as has been seen earlier with the respondents from theforest company in Hemlock Valley. Today, all new projects are subject toenvironmental assessments. The validity and efficiency of these processes arebeyond the scope of this project although some examples such as the JumboGlacier resort38 come to mind. It is debatable whether these regulationsmeet a level that is appropriate for a land base where the focus is on tourism,especially year-round tourism. In Sun Peaks, one respondent expressed hisconcerns about these standards in relation to the logging industry:“I am thinking that the minute you start to have summer visitorsthere is no question that what you have done, even cutting theski trails or if you are going to do some ongoing logging withinthe municipal boundaries where the walking and hiking public isgoing to go, you are going to have to change the standards abovethe normal logging standards.” [Sun Peaks]Similarly, a participant from Whistler explained that the type of forestryperformed by the CCF goes beyond these regulations, specifically on theissue of old-growth forest management:38http://jumboglacierresort.com/ This whole development makes me think that politicsand economics still are the primary criteria at work, far before environmental concern orpublic opinion, sadly. However, as the resort if well above tree line and this project triesto focus on forest management it will stay at that.1015.3. Environmental impacts and their mitigation in relation to the shift“I think that we do a lot more. For example the rule says ’youhave to keep so much old-growth forest by ecosystem type’ andI think that the rule around here is around 19% that must bekept in that seral stage. And our goal in the EBM plan is 40%so we kind of do more than the average. In our plan it is veryclear, it says that tourism is by far the most important industryhere.” [Whistler]Again, there is not a direct link to the shift except that it reflects a changein visitor behaviour between winter and summer, between adrenaline andnature.5.3.4 ConclusionEven if more development of large year-round tourism resorts is not thebest thing that can happen to the land from a wilderness and environmentperspective, successful transitions to the year-round model could be used asa powerful educational tool to raise awareness amongst the public: touristsare more receptive and observant during the summer months; a year-roundcommunity is healthy and wealthy39 and has a lifestyle that fosters a highlevel of land stewardship. Moreover, for a year-round resort the prime prod-uct sold is the experience of pristine nature so there is a strong incentive toexceed government environmental regulation. The example of the collabo-ration between Mount Washington and the Tony Barrett Marmot RecoveryFoundation (cf. chapter 3.4) could also be considered an example of highstandard environmental stewardship.A counter argument is that the most significant environmental impact ofthe ski industry is associated with the automobiles necessary to access theresorts. Any Life Cycle Assessment of a ski resort shows that transportationis, by far, the number one contributor to environmental impacts. Therefore,Whistler is indirectly responsible for a significant amount of greenhouse gasemissions leading to climate change. There is an “irony” that has beenstudied by Stoddart [2011b] based on the concepts by Wysocki [2012]. It isalso highlight in one of the respondents’ interviews from Whistler:“I don’t think that I can justify tourism on environmental grounds,period. The impacts are significant. In the broad picture trans-portation is the most important, not the impact that we have on39Sorry, could not resist...1025.4. A link to the quality of life of communitiesthe watersheds here. It’s the amount of carbon that is emitted.That’s the gorilla.” [Whistler]The same respondent describes an ambivalent feeling towards the Olympics.As stated in chapter 5.1.2, the highway upgrade and the missed opportunityfor alternative modes of transportation contributes to the irony describedby Stoddart [2011b].5.4 A link to the quality of life of communitiesNearly all interviewees stated in one way or another that the shift had been,or would be, tremendously beneficial for the quality of life in the four studiedcommunities. 34 out of 38 participants (i.e. 92%) concurred. In the case ofHemlock Valley it was clear that all participants (who were almost all full-time residents, not second-home owners, see chapter 2.2.2 for a discussionabout the potential issue about this) would welcome the quality of life thatwould result from a successful shift. As one respondent from Whistler ratherenthusiastically, if not bluntly, put it:“Oh, that’s a no-brainer! Massive improvement of the quality oflife...” [Whistler]Quality of life is a research field of its own and it is far from the objectivesof this project to do a Quality of Life Assessment (QLA) of the communities.Aspinall, Cukier, and Doberstein [2011] performs such an assessment in thecase of the Jumbo Creek Glacier project in BC. The results seem to indicatethat residents of the neighbouring communities acknowledge the fact thatthere would be economic benefits but perceive that the loss from the socialand environmental point of view would outbalance the gains. This is alsowhat was found in another study in Sweden by Lindberg and Andersson[2001] where welfare/gain are compared between residents and tourists foran hypothetical expansion of a ski resort. It is to be noted that in both thesearticles the “residents” are only of the human kind. The studied shift is notexactly similar to the Jumbo project because it is not considering a tourismdevelopment ex-nihilo but a change in business in an already implanted re-sort. It is very different in the case of Whistler but could be argued to beless different in the case of the development extention for Hemlock Valley,would it go forward with the envisioned scale. There are similitudes thoughin the case of the Swedish ski resort. I think that it is useful to keep in mindthat not all tourism development can be equated with general benefits for1035.4. A link to the quality of life of communitiescommunities.5.4.1 Impacts from the shift on community welfareFirst and foremost, the biggest influence for an increase in the quality oflife is year-round employment and employment security which leads to thepossibility of families settling. It directly impacts the sense of belongingto the place and therefore the sense of community. This has a positivereinforcement effect (like a positive feedback loop) that has been explainedin chapter 5.1.1 with the importance of becoming a municipality. Thenamenities not directly related to tourism start to appear and this furtherreinforces the strength of the community. A respondent from Sun Peaksexemplifies it with the example of the elementary school, which opened in2010:“That’s easy, the simplest measure right at the top of my headis the school. When I first got here in 1993, we were in our twen-ties, there are people I worked with (couples or not) who havemoved away and have since moved back to the community in thelast three or four years with their children because of the schooland because there are year-round opportunity to create income.Without summer, without the municipality, the business theywould have not come back here. So there is a direct positivecorrelation.” [Sun Peaks]In a newspaper article from The Kamloops Daily News40 of September 1st,2010, Al Raine (Mayor of Sun Peaks) is quoted saying that the school is “aparent-driven initiative that marks a turning point for the fledgling munici-pality [and] he hopes having a school at Sun Peaks encourages more peopleto live there year-round.” It is undeniable that the quality of life is linkedto the amenities for residents and a successful shift allows for both a greateramount of activities in relation to the tourism business of the resorts butalso more resident-centric amenities.In Whistler, this is recognized by many participants, comparing theamount of activities and the quality of life that results with the size ofthe community, when counting only residents (around 10,000 people), withany other community of the same size:40http://www.kamloopsnews.ca/article/20100901/KAMLOOPS0101/309019988/-1/kamloops/sun-peaks-parents-create-own-school-for-kids (accessed in March 2014)1045.4. A link to the quality of life of communities“The more infrastructure and development in Whistler is goingto make my experience as a community member better; my chil-dren, my wife and I have an enormous amount of things we cando for a community this size.” [Whistler]“For a town of 10,000 people, we are doing quite well for our-selves. You look at a town of 10,000 in the interior or the northand they have what? Two restaurants, one of which is attachedto the local motel... It is a very different quality of life. And wemake sacrifices in terms of the tourists and everything and we arereliant on external forces for our economy and jobs.” [Whistler]However, one respondent in the resort explained that if Whistler couldprovide management jobs year round, allowing the birth of a middle-classthat can settle down with the help of the staff housing program, this couldlead to a sense of entitlement. It can be linked with the previous quoteabout sacrifices. He said:“This place has amenities to a critical mass not found anywhereelse in the world and sometimes there is a false sense of entitle-ment here too. [...] Is it (life quality and job positions) obtain-able? Yes. Do you have to work for it? Absolutely.” [Whistler]Yet, in a place like Hemlock Valley, where such a development did notoccur, it is clear that the quality of life of the residents is at stake witha development to year-round resort. A participant from this communityclearly links it to the possibility for young people to enter the system:“So I believe that a shift to a twelve months operation, to agrowing community, aside from a community centre and a poolwhich would eventually come years down the road... Attractingparticularly young ones because the average age here is probablybetween 96 and dead. Ah Ah it’s not that bad but it’s probably60. I’m 60! We need young and energetic people who are lookingfor their future and their children instead of us old people plan-ning where to plant ourselves when we crook. [...] There is noquestion in my mind that when we start to develop and evolvewe will enjoy a better quality of life.” [Hemlock Valley]Also the impression that something is happening and that one is notleft behind could improve the self-esteem of the residents as a respondentshared:1055.4. A link to the quality of life of communities“And then he [Mr Berezan, the new resort owner] said he wouldpave the road and then he changed his mind... And after a whileyou start to wonder if anything would ever happen. Should hedo it, I think it would be like: WOW! it’s happening! Everybodywould get on board, finally! But at this moment it is stuck. Youmay have seen all the real estate signs around, would anythinghappen, these things would start selling. And it doesn’t needmuch, just anything...” [Hemlock Valley]The same respondent declared that he felt like he was still living with a56k-modem while the rest of the world was living with highspeed Internet.I find the metaphor quite powerful41.Ultimately, the shift has been identified as improving equity in the twostudied resorts having performed the shift. Five out of seven interviewees inSun Peaks believed that equity in the resort had improved over the past twoyears, which has been identified as the time for the shift. 7 out of 21 voiced asimilar opinion in Whistler. Some people link it to the emergence of a middleclass, and some people say that it moderates the “mill town” phenomenon(already explored in chapter 5.1.3) by improving communication betweenthe community and the resort/lift company. All agree that it is as much anecessity for the success of the resort as it is an appreciated outcome. Forinstance, the two following quotes from participants in Sun Peaks developedthis idea:“The community won’t grow if it is like some coal mining townin the Appalachians, you cannot be like that.” [Sun Peaks]“Here the mountain company has to deal with the fact that wehave a municipality. And as the community is growing there isa greater diversity of people. The role of the master developertwenty years ago was about 100% in terms of his impact anddecision ability over the community. Now it is still very strongand over 50% but it is reduced from where it was. So yes, thereis more equity.” [Sun Peaks]5.4.2 ConclusionIt is clear that the quality of life would benefit from a successful shift, mostlybecause of the following reasons:41Even if he was watching cable TV through highspeed Internet while I was conductingthe interview, somehow decreasing the impact of said metaphor.1065.4. A link to the quality of life of communities• year round employment, leading to the stability necessary for familiesto settle down and strengthen the sense of community,• economic benefits,• moving away from the “mill town” model with regard to the resort/liftcompany,• amenities such as community centres, cultural amenities (museum,galleries, etc.), sport amenities, education facilities (the school thatopened in Sun Peaks is unanimously regarded as a major step forwardfor the community),• high quality of life because of the beauty of the surroundings, but thereis a price to pay as the costs of living in a resort are notoriously high.107Chapter 6Conclusion and perspectives6.1 Conclusion: does the shift change forestmanagement in a positive way?6.1.1 Does the shift influence forest management?Forest management is very different in the four case studies. In HemlockValley, it is pretty much not affected by the resort whereas it gradually movestowards greater communication and control moving from Mount Washing-ton resort to Sun Peaks resort and Whistler with its community forest. Thisis due to their intrinsic differences (location, size, etc.) I also think that itis clear that forest management has been affected by the shift from win-ter only to year-round business. The main impact of a successful shift isthe change in weighting of recreational and visual values in the forests’ use.The increase of these values in management is linked directly to the amountof people using the forests surrounding the resorts and more importantlyduring summer months. Thus, it is due to the resorts’ commercial successand their shift to year-round. The hypothesis about the system boundariesexpansion seems to be valid to a certain extent if not totally related to theshift. The expansion and recreation users’ ubiquity is certainly exacerbatedby it.From the residents’ point of view, the boundaries expansion promotes theinclusion of more stakeholders in the system. All stakeholders have vested,sometimes antagonistic, interests in the forest but the amount of stakehold-ers seems to lead to self-regulation mechanisms in land stewardship (in thesense of Ostrom [1999] and not Hardin [1968] which is a good thing, at leastless depressing). The shift also seems to foster a will in the communities totry innovative management strategies for the forests such as the use of EBMplans in the case of Whistler, or the “groomed gladding” on the slopes ofSun Peaks.From the visitors’ point of view, the sheer amount of people and the state1086.1. Conclusion: does the shift change forest management in a positive way?Figure 6.1: Scheme summarizing the forest management and environmentalimpacts due to the shift.of mind they find themselves in during summer lead to high levels of aware-ness about the environment, some levels of scrutiny and, with the help ofinformation technologies (IT), a higher priority for environmental steward-ship in the communities. Pristine nature has become a product that shiftedcommunities sell, rather than being solely adrenaline opportunity providers.However, it cannot be excluded that this is not a direct consequence fromthe shift but a product of our times (and again location: BC residents, atleast in the Lower Mainland, are quite nature friendly42 and the Province’smarketing division also sells pristine nature to visitors.) This can be linkedto the residents’ part through a self-enforcing loop because tourists have anappreciation for “green communities.” However, someone with an amountof cynicism could say that it opens the door to green washing. This laststatement needs to be put into perspective, maybe through scrutiny andnew/current technologies of the social sharing kind.Both these aspects lead to an improvement of forestry practices if seenfrom a more balanced ecosystem services and management standpoint. In-42possibly self-described... there is a lot of irony in the sense of Wysocki [2012] there...1096.1. Conclusion: does the shift change forest management in a positive way?deed, multiple uses of the forest are taken into consideration and the levelof stewardship has been shown to exceed governmental regulations, at leastin the two successful cases studied. Figure 6.1 is an attempt at expressingthis conclusion graphically.On a side note, I believe that, historically, Whistler had a significantimpact on forest management and tourism legislations because it hostedsome individuals who fostered innovative thinking: LUPs, LRMPs, the use ofCommunity Forest in non-extraction-based communities, resort municipalitystatus, and the RMI funding, etc. I would like to think that the shift andthe resulting quality of life increase had an effect on that.6.1.2 Does the quality of life increase for the residents?What are the environmental impacts?The residents’ quality of life in undoubtedly higher in Whistler and SunPeaks than it is in Hemlock Valley. I will not consider here Mount Wash-ington as it is not really a living community. It raises the quality of life ofthe Comox Valley residents though, but it is a different phenomenon.There is an amount of indicators that can be used to evaluate the qualityof life of a community: economics of course, but also job stability, culturaland recreational amenities, etc. However, I think that a powerful indicatoris residents’ opinion and the results of this study clearly show that the shiftis beneficial. There is the “growth create jobs” aspect, but I believe it is avery primitive view if taken solely. A sense of equity and a move away fromthe “mill town” model also result from the shift and have a self-reinforcingeffect on the community strength and health.However, from a strictly environmental impact perspective it is very hardto conclude. On the one hand, as explained just before, nature is sold as aproduct therefore there is a incentive to keep it as “pristine” as possible, butincreasing access to it definitely has impacts on non-human inhabitants ofthe land base. As one of the respondents said, “[we] can[not] justify tourismon environmental grounds, period.” I would like to moderate this. On theother hand, the “honey pot” effect and the anti-sprawl mechanisms used inWhistler for instance, have a tendency to make me feel that these impactscan be mitigated, that a lot has been learned and that these resorts areperforming better management now, at least in the successful case studiesof this research project. I am convinced that development will happen if1106.1. Conclusion: does the shift change forest management in a positive way?deemed economically beneficial and that not much can really prevent it.However, mitigation mechanisms have been shown to exist and Whistlercould be seen as a specialist in the sense of Niels Bohr: “An expert is aman who has made all the obvious mistakes which can be made, in a narrowfield.” This successful year-round mountain resort has a strong value inbeing an example for other resorts in development. The drawback is thatit also attracts a lot of visitors, from all over the world, and from a LifeCycle Assessment point of view the impact of transportation is critical. Itis, however, difficult to compare the latter with the former and asserts if theend justifies the means.6.1.3 What is a successful shift and how to do it?Figure 6.2: Scheme summarizing the shift mechanismsFigure 6.2 explains the mechanisms at play that can lead to a successfulshift. The critical part is, in my opinion, the incorporation into a municipal-ity, more specifically into a resort municipality. This allows for a differentlevel of negotiation possibility with higher levels of government. It also givesaccess to economic benefits such as the RMI funding which is a powerful toolto enhance summer through the use of large events. This creates a momen-tum and a marketing impact necessary to go beyond the fact that mountainresorts are still mostly seen as ski resorts, i.e. snow-based. In order to be-come a municipality, a strong community with a strong sense of communityis necessary. This is a product of charismatic individuals, location, timing,and an already fairly successful winter business. One thing is for sure, ashift requires a conscious action for the local government and will not hap-1116.2. Perspectives: further research neededpen organically.In addition, there are strong correlations that can be made with moun-tain biking and golfing which are activities necessary for a successful shift.They do not act as triggers or causes though. Mountain biking is a criticalattraction for a summer resort due to its success with recreationists. Golfing,its ties to real estate and to the shoulder-season conferencing activities isanother important part of the creation of a sustainable year-round business.These activities address different demographics and therefore are importantfrom a diversification point of view. Successful resorts need to provide asatisfying experience for the whole age range.The link to the presence of a community forest is difficult to make forsure as I think it is too location-dependent.6.1.4 Global conclusionAs with all case studies, the results of this project are dependent on thesites and the specific assumptions and simplifications made in question de-sign and data analysis. Nonetheless, I believe that some traits can be usefulto put forward as indications or recommendations for future developments.So, in a nutshell: yes, a shift in seasonal management of a mountain re-sort influences the forest management in the surrounding land base, movingmore towards recreation and visual values and less extraction. The shiftenhances the quality of life of the residents and enhances the quality of thevisitors’ experience which in turn improves the wealth and health of thecommunities. Is it good for the environment? I do not know.6.2 Perspectives: further research needed6.2.1 Addressing the climate change issueI recently, 14th of March to be exact, read the following43:“UN scientists are set to deliver their darkest report yet on theimpacts of climate change, pointing to a future stalked by floods,drought, conflict and economic damage if carbon emissions go43From slashdot: http://science.slashdot.org/story/14/03/23/179215/ippcs-darkest-yet-climate-report-warns-of-food-water-shortages1126.2. Perspectives: further research neededuntamed. A draft of their report, seen by the news organisationAFP, is part of a massive overview by the IntergovernmentalPanel on Climate Change, likely to shape policies and climatetalks for years to come. Scientists and government representa-tives will meet in Yokohama, Japan, from tomorrow to hammerout a 29-page summary. It will be unveiled with the full reporton March 31. ’We have a lot clearer picture of impacts andtheir consequences ... including the implications for security,’said Chris Field of the US’s Carnegie Institution, who headedthe probe.The work comes six months after the first volume in the long-awaited Fifth Assessment Report declared scientists were morecertain than ever that humans caused global warming. It pre-dicted global temperatures would rise 0.3C-4.8C this century,adding to roughly 0.7C since the Industrial Revolution. Seaswill creep up by 26cm-82cm by 2100. The draft warns costs willspiral with each additional degree, although it is hard to forecastby how much.”This is very worrying and, given the premisses of the whole MSc in Forestryadventure, something I feel the need to comment upon.It has been stated in chapter 1.1 that climate change per se was notconsidered a trigger for the shift, even if the literature in chapter 1.3.1proposed it as such. I explained in that chapter why I do not consider it asa major cause of concern for this research. Therefore, I refrained from askinga direct question about climate change, or to hint at it, during the interviewsbut still kept track of its occurrences as a keyword during the analysis phasein order to see if participants would bring it into the conversation. Quitesurprisingly only a few interviewees addressed it. The participants who didso were the ones involved in long term planning for the studied communities,which as an afterthought is not so curious. That is not to say that climatechange is denied by respondents from my sample base, just that it doesnot appear to be in the priority of their agenda. It does not deter thecommunities from being environmentally conscious. Maybe climate changeis actually already pervasive in BC residents’ life. One of the respondentsfrom Whistler makes an interesting point:“Speaking from experience, growing up in Australia the wholeclimate change is not as much right in your face, I don’t think wehave a single glacier, we have never had year-round snow in the1136.2. Perspectives: further research neededcountry. But then you come here and you can see the impact andthat really sticks in your mind. I think it gets people thinkinga little bit more about the importance of looking out for theenvironment.” [Whistler]Facing the gravity of the climate change situation, it can look frivolousto address snow tourism. However, the issue of climate change with relationto ski resorts is an interesting one for many reasons. This research tackledthe business diversification mitigation strategy but some resorts go, or arewilling to go, to extreme actions in order to provide snow for their customer-s/visitors, as described by Buczynski based on research in Arizona [Pruden,2012]. Such actions will have many cascading effects on the ecology of theresorts and on the local communities. I have read an amount of reportswhere businessmen assert that it will still be possible to ski in 2050 giventhe right amount of engineering. I consider a diversification such as thestudied shift a much saner way to proceed.It has already been discussed that transportation is the most importantfactor when doing a LCA of “a ski trip”. This raises a lot of questions,out of the scope of this research and probably generalizable to tourism ingeneral. A valuable contribution could be the impact of individuals livingin such places as Whistler on policy making, or the value of example andthe raise of environmental awareness that could take place in the resorts.6.2.2 How to compare tourism and forestry?There is a need for a precise way to compare economics between tourismand forestry. This research showed that this is a difficult thing to do. First,the comparison should not be purely in economics even if it should be aneasy way to, at least, bring figures into the debate. The research showedideas on how to relate the shift (and therefore to an extent compare forestryand tourism) to the quality of life of the communities but it did not pro-vide numbers. In chapter 5.2.1, I tried to give some thoughts about it butcould not find any satisfactory answers. I feel there is room here for a wholenew project: investigating in a exhaustive manner all economic inputs for acommunity and try to relate it to the land base. Available data are roomoccupation rates, taxes, and amount of skiers who bought a ski pass or a liftticket. However, we are faced with some difficulties such as how to quantifythe impact of all the recreation companies and to relate it to the land used.Linking everything to the land is critical to be able to compare to forestry1146.2. Perspectives: further research neededactivities.Besides, in many of my interviews, people talked about “real figures”versus what one can only think are “tempered with” ones. When a treeis cut down and transformed into wood products, the economic impact ismore than the price of the trunk sold at the mill. The whole economy(transportation, workers in the whole production chain, etc.) benefits from itthe same way the service industry benefits from a great snowfall on a Friday,and not only at the resort. Most participants, when reflecting on such issueswith my injunctions for them to evaluate the benefits of the shift, speakof “multiplying factors” allegedly to take into account the aforementionedconcepts but at the end we still compare apples and oranges, maybe evenapples and staples.6.2.3 Other mountain resort developments of interestI am aware of two new development projects in BC for year-round moun-tain resorts: GAS - Garibaldi at Squamish and the Glacier Creek Jumboresort. The latter has been studied extensively in the literature (for in-stance by Stoddart [2011a]) but the former seems to be largely unaddressed.I found one masters’ thesis [Armour, 2008] using it as an example for tourismwhile exploring community development in relation to the environment inSquamish. These resorts do not fall into the focus of this research: GAS is anew ex-nihilo development and the Jumbo Glacier resort is well above treeline. However, there are some interesting issues.In the development plan for the GAS resort, the following is stated: “Inaddition to alpine skiing, the mountain development area will be used forNordic skiing and snowshoeing in the winter, and lift rides, hiking, interpre-tive trails, site-seeing, mountain biking, horseback riding, dining, festivalsand events, etc. during the summer their will be mountain biking and 2golf courses will be constructed.” (On the ReMax real estate website forSquamish44). This shows clearly that the resort is planned as a year-roundresort from the starting point and that mountain biking and golfing arethought to play a significant role, as shown in this research.There are many things that could be said about the Jumbo Glacier re-sort but what I think is the most interesting, in relation with the findings44http://www.ownsquamish.com/gas.php (accessed March 2014)1156.2. Perspectives: further research neededin this research, is that it was granted the resort municipality status, there-fore being able to access RMI funding. However, to my knowledge, there isno community whatsoever there (at the moment?). It looks like a power-ful statement of intentions and incentive from the Provincial government infavour of the development. However, it supports my assertions about theimportance of the RMI as an economic tool. Again, this resort does notpartake in this research as it is a year-round ski resort, in the sense that onecan ski there year-round because it is a glacier, not that they have summeractivities once the snow has melted. Climate change may (will?) see tothat. Besides, it is also a resort to be developed therefore not transitingfrom anything to year-round. As one of the respondents said: “The Jumboproject is typical of human beings not learning the lessons from the past”.Indeed.Both projects seem unreasonable to me. Developments in the history ofthese resorts will prove interesting to follow.116BibliographyGloria (global observation research initiative in alpine environment. http://www.gloria.ac.at/. Accessed: October 2012.Coralie Achin and Emmanuelle George-Marcelpoil. Sorties de piste pourla performance touristique des stations de sports d’hiver. Tourisme &Territoires, 3:67–92, 2013. URL http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00942343/.B. Amelung, S. Nicholls, and D. Viner. Implications of Global ClimateChange for Tourism Flows and Seasonality. Journal of Travel Re-search, 45(3):285–296, February 2007. ISSN 0047-2875. doi: 10.1177/0047287506295937. URL http://jtr.sagepub.com/cgi/doi/10.1177/0047287506295937.Kimberley Armour. Based Sustainable Behaviour: Identifying Barriers toSustainable Behaviour and Encouraging Integrated Community Based Ap-proaches. PhD thesis, 2008. URL http://www.kimberleyarmour.com/uploads/1/1/6/0/11603458/thesis-kimberleyarmourmeec2006.pdf.Alison Aspinall, Judie Cukier, and Brent Doberstein. Quality of Life As-sessments and Social Sustainability: Ski Tourism Development in Inver-mere, British Columbia. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policyand Management, 13(02):179–201, June 2011. ISSN 1464-3332. doi:10.1142/S1464333211003845. URL http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S1464333211003845.Sharon Bicknell and Phil Mcmanus. The Canary in the Coalmine: Aus-tralian Ski Resorts and their Response to Climate Change. Geographi-cal Research, 44(4):386–400, December 2006. ISSN 1745-5863. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-5871.2006.00409.x. URL http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/j.1745-5871.2006.00409.x.Pierre Bourdieu. The Practice of Reflexive Sociology. In An Invitation toReflexive Sociology, pages 218–260. 1992. ISBN 0-226-06741-6. URL http://www.public.iastate.edu/~carlos/607/readings/bourdieu2.pdf.117BibliographyB. Buczynski. Making snow with recycled sewage couldbreed super bacteria. http://www.care2.com/causes/making-snow-with-recycled-sewage-could-breed-super-bacteria.html. published October 17, 2012, accessed on October 30, 2012.Shelley Burgin and Nigel Hardiman. Extreme sports in natural areas : loom-ing disaster or a catalyst for a paradigm shift in land use planning ? Jour-nal of Environmental Planning and Management, 55(7):921–940, 2012.URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2011.634228PLEASE.Rolf Bu¨rki, Hans Elsasser, and Bruno Abegg. Climate change-impacts onthe tourism industry in mountain areas. In 1st International Conferenceon Climate Change and Tourism, Djerba, 9-11 April 2003, number April,pages 9–11, 2003. URL http://www.breiling.org/snow/djerba.pdf.Jennifer W Burt and Kevin J Rice. Not all ski slopes are created equal:disturbance intensity affects ecosystem properties. Ecological applications: a publication of the Ecological Society of America, 19(8):2242–53, De-cember 2009. ISSN 1051-0761. URL http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20014591.Charles Camic, Pierre Bourdieu, and Loic J. D. Wacquant. An Invitationto Reflexive Sociology., 1993. ISSN 00943061.Don Clifton. Progressing a Sustainable-world: A Socio-ecological ResiliencePerspective. Journal of Sustainable Development, 3(4):74–97, 2010.Curtis C. Daehler. Upper-montane plant invasions in the Hawaiian Islands:Patterns and opportunities. Perspectives in Plant Ecology, Evolutionand Systematics, 7(3):203–216, December 2005. ISSN 14338319. doi:10.1016/j.ppees.2005.08.002. URL http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1433831905000223.Terry C. Daniel. Measuring the quality of the natural environment: Apsychophysical approach., 1990. ISSN 0003-066X.Ron S. Daniel, Terry C. , Boster. Measuring Landscape Esthetics: TheScenic Beauty Estimation Method. USDA Forest Service Research Paper,1976.Arthur De Jong. Whistler Blackcombs Climate Change and Resource Effi-ciency Strategy. PhD thesis, Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, Canada,2013.118BibliographyJessica Dempsey. The Politics of Nature in British Columbias Great BearRainforest. Geoforum, 42(2):211–221, March 2011. ISSN 00167185. doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2010.12.003. URL http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0016718510001454.F. Douard. La ville de va¨xjo¨ en sue`de de´ja` en route vers le ze´ro carbone,bioenergie international - magazine et portail d’information. http://www.bioenergie-promotion.fr/20842/, 2012a. published May 10, 2012,accessed October 2012.F. Douard. La ville de bor˚as en sue`de veut se passer totalement des e´nergiesfossiles, bioenergie international - magazine et portail d’information.http://www.bioenergie-promotion.fr/18596/, 2012b. published Jan-uary 31, 2012, accessed October 2012.Riley E. Dunlap and Angela G. Mertig. Global Concern for the Environment:Is Affluence a Prerequisite? Journal of Social Issues, 51:121–137, 1995.ISSN 00224537, 15404560. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4560.1995.tb01351.x. URLhttp://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1995.tb01351.x.Ecosign Mountain Resort Planners Ltd. Sun Peaks resort Master Plan Up-date. Technical report, 2006.Timothy Forsyth. Mountain Myths Revisited: Integrating Natural and So-cial Environmental Science. Mountain Research and Development, 18(2):107–116, 1998.Alison Gill. From growth machine to growth management: the dynamics ofresort development in Whistler, British Columbia. Environment and Plan-ning A, 32(6):1083–1103, 2000. ISSN 0308-518X. doi: 10.1068/a32160.URL http://www.envplan.com/abstract.cgi?id=a32160.Alison Gill and Peter Williams. Managing growth in mountaintourism communities. Tourism Management, 15(3):212–220, June 1994.ISSN 02615177. doi: 10.1016/0261-5177(94)90107-4. URL http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/0261517794901074.Alison M. Gill and Peter W. Williams. Rethinking resort growth: under-standing evolving governance strategies in Whistler, British Columbia.Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 19(4-5):629–648, May 2011. ISSN0966-9582. doi: 10.1080/09669582.2011.558626. URL http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09669582.2011.558626.119BibliographyAdrienne Greˆt-Regamey, Sibyl Hanna Brunner, and Felix Kienast. Moun-tain Ecosystem Services: Who Cares? Mountain Research and . . . ,32:S23–S34, 2012. URL http://www.bioone.org/doi/pdf/10.1659/MRD-JOURNAL-D-10-00115.S1.Ivan Griffin and Ita Richardson. Using LATEX for Qualitative Data Anal-ysis. The PracTEX Journal, (1):1–17, 2010.Garreth Hardin. The tragedy of the commons. Science, 162(3859):1242–1248, March 1968. ISSN 1532-7361.Garrett Hardin. Extensions of ”The Tragedy of the Commons”. Science,280(5364):682–683, May 1998. doi: 10.1126/science.280.5364.682. URLhttp://www.sciencemag.org/content/280/5364/682.short.Henry F. Diaz and Connie I. Millar. The Mountain Views Newsletter, 2008.James Higham and Tom Hinch. Tourism, sport and seasons: the challengesand potential of overcoming seasonality in the sport and tourism sectors.Tourism Management, 23(2):175–185, April 2002. ISSN 02615177. doi: 10.1016/S0261-5177(01)00046-2. URL http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0261517701000462.Simon Hudson. Sport and adventure tourism. Routledge, 2012.Simon Hudson, Brent Ritchie, and Seldjan Timur. Measuring destinationcompetitiveness: An empirical study of Canadian ski resorts. Tourismand Hospitality Planning & . . . , (April 2013):37–41, 2004. URL http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1479053042000187810.Ronald Inglehart. Culture shift in advanced industrial society. PrincetonUniversity Press, 1990.Tazim B. Jamal and Donald Getz. Collaboration theory and communitytourism planning. Annals of Tourism Research, 22(1):186–204, 1995.J. P. (Hamish) Kimmins. Biodiversity, Beauty and the ” Beast ”: Arebeautiful forests sustainable, are sustainable forests beautiful, and is ”smal” always ecologically desirable? The Forestry Chronicle, 75(6):955–960,1999.Urs Koenig and Bruno Abegg. Impacts of climate change on wintertourism in the Swiss Alps. Journal of sustainable tourism, 5(April 2013):37–41, 1997. URL http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09669589708667275.120BibliographyBruno Latour. Nous n’avons jamais e´te´ modernes–Essai d’anthropologiesyme´trique. La de´couverte, 1992.Bruno Latour. Politiques de la nature: comment faire entrer les sciences ende´mocratie. La De´couverte Paris, 1999.Kreg Lindberg and Tommy D Andersson. Assessing Social Gains and Losses.Annals of Tourism Research, 28(4):1010–1030, 2001.Christopher M Little and Mark D Needham. Skier and snowboarder mo-tivations and knowledge related to voluntary environmental programsat an alpine ski area. Environmental management, 48(5):895–909, De-cember 2011. ISSN 1432-1009. doi: 10.1007/s00267-011-9734-0. URLhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21858713.RE Manning, DW Lime, and M Hof. Social carrying capacity of natural ar-eas: Theory and application in the US national parks. Natural Areas Jour-nal, 16:118–127, 1996. URL http://www.cabdirect.org/abstracts/19961807695.html.Jon Moen and Peter Fredman. Effects of Climate Change on Alpine Skiing inSweden. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 15(4):418–437, July 2007. ISSN0966-9582. doi: 10.2167/jost624.0. URL http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.2167/jost624.0.C. Mukerji. The Great Forestry Survey of 1669-1671: The Use of Archivesfor Political Reform. Social Studies of Science, 37(2):227–253, April 2007.ISSN 0306-3127. doi: 10.1177/0306312706063785. URL http://sss.sagepub.com/cgi/doi/10.1177/0306312706063785.Joan Iverson Nassauer. Messy ecosystems, orderly frames. LandscapeJournal, 14(2):161–170, 1995. doi: 10.3368/lj.14.2.161. URL http://lj.uwpress.org/content/14/2/161.short.Mark D. Needham, Rick B. Rollins, and Colin J.B. Wood. Site-specific en-counters, norms and crowding of summer visitors at alpine ski areas. In-ternational Journal of Tourism Research, 6(6):421–437, November 2004a.ISSN 1099-2340. doi: 10.1002/jtr.504. URL http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/jtr.504.Mark D. Needham, Colin J. B. Wood, and Rick B. Rollins. Understand-ing Summer Visitors and Their Experiences at the Whistler MountainSki Area, Canada. Mountain Research and Development, 24(3):234–242,121BibliographyAugust 2004b. ISSN 0276-4741. doi: 10.1659/0276-4741(2004)024[0234:USVATE]2.0.CO;2.NSSA. Nssa (national sustainable slope association). http://www.nsaa.org/. accessed on Oct. 10, 2012.Elinor Ostrom. Coping with tragedies of the commons. Annual review of po-litical science, 2(1968):493–535, 1999. URL http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.polisci.2.1.493.Elinor Ostrom, James Walker, and R Gardner. Covenants with and withouta sword: Self-governance is possible. American Political Science . . . , 86(2):404–417, 1992. URL http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0003055400089048.An´ıbal Pauchard, Christoph Kueffer, Hansjo¨rg Dietz, Curtis C Daehler,Jake Alexander, Peter J Edwards, Jose´ Ramo´n Are´valo, Lohengrin aCavieres, Antoine Guisan, Sylvia Haider, Gabi Jakobs, Keith McDougall,Constance I Millar, Bridgett J Naylor, Catherine G Parks, Lisa J Rew,and Tim Seipel. Ain’t no mountain high enough: plant invasions reach-ing new elevations. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 7(9):479–486, November 2009. ISSN 1540-9295. doi: 10.1890/080072. URLhttp://www.esajournals.org/doi/abs/10.1890/080072.Shane Pegg, Ian Patterson, and Pablo Vila Gariddo. The impact ofseasonality on tourism and hospitality operations in the alpine regionof New South Wales, Australia. International Journal of HospitalityManagement, 31(3):659–666, September 2012. ISSN 02784319. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2011.09.001. URL http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0278431911001459.J. Pickerill. Cyberprotest: Environmental Activism Online. Manchester Uni-versity Press, 2003. ISBN 9780719063947. URL http://books.google.ca/books?id=Hen3NYxRFaoC.O’Brien M. Mazzochette M. Fahrenfeld N. Pruden, A. Antibiotic ResistanceGene Testing of Recycled Water Samples in Flagstaff, AZ - SummaryReport to Dr. Robin Silver. 2012. accessed on octobre 30, 2012.Jorge Rivera, Peter de Leon, and Charles Koerber. Is Greener WhiterYet? The Sustainable Slopes Program after Five Years. Policy Stud-ies Journal, 34(2):195–221, May 2006. ISSN 0190-292X. doi: 10.122Bibliography1111/j.1541-0072.2006.00166.x. URL http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/j.1541-0072.2006.00166.x.H. J. Rubin and I. S Rubin. Foundations of Qualitative Interviewing. InQualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data, chapter 2, pages 17–41. 1995. ISBN 9780803950962, 0803950950, 9780803950955, 0803950969.John Saremba and Alison M. Gill. Value conflicts in mountain park settings.Annals of Tourism Research, 18:455–472, 1991.Daniel Scott and Geoff McBoyle. Climate change adaptation in the ski indus-try. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 12(8):1411–1431, December 2006. ISSN 1381-2386. doi: 10.1007/s11027-006-9071-4.URL http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11027-006-9071-4.Daniel Scott, Geoff McBoyle, and Alanna Minogue. Climate change andQuebec’s ski industry. Global Environmental Change, 17(2):181–190, May2007. ISSN 09593780. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.05.004. URL http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0959378006000549.Herbert Snyder. Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data, vol-ume 18. 1996. ISBN 0761920749 (cloth). doi: 10.1016/S0740-8188(96)90024-9.JR Stilgoe. Gone barefoot lately? American Journal of Preventive Medicine,20(3):243–244, 2001. URL http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&btnG=Search&q=intitle:Gone+Barefoot+Lately+?#0.Mark C.J. Stoddart. Leisure, nature and environmental movements in themass media: comparing Jumbo Pass and the Tobeatic Wilderness Area,Canada. Leisure Studies, 30(4):407–422, October 2011a. ISSN 0261-4367.doi: 10.1080/02614367.2011.574231. URL http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02614367.2011.574231.MCJ Stoddart. ”If we wanted to be Environmentally Sustainable, we’d takethe Bus”: Skiing, Mobility, and the Irony of Climate Change. HumanEcology Review, 18(1):19–29, 2011b. ISSN 1074-4827. URL http://w.humanecologyreview.org/pastissues/her181/stoddart.pdf.PA Stokowski and CB LaPointe. Environmental and social effects ofATVs and ORVs: an annotated bibliography and research assessment.Burlington, Vermont, University of . . . , (November):32, 2000. URLhttps:// Strauss and J Corbin. Grounded theory methodology. Hand-book of qualitative research, pages 273–285, 1994. URLhttp://cms.educ.ttu.edu/uploadedFiles/personnel-folder/lee-duemer/epsy-5382/documents/Groundedtheorymethodology.pdf.Vancouver Island Marmot Recovery Team. Recovery Strategy for the Van-couver Island Marmot (Marmota vancouverensis) in British Columbia.Technical Report November, 2008. URL http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi= The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: Mainstreamingthe Economics of Nature: A synthesis of the approach, conclusions andrecommendations of TEEB. 2010. ISBN 9783981341034.DB Tindall, Scott Davies, and C Mauboules. Activism and conservationbehavior in an environmental movement: The contradictory effects ofgender. Society & Natural Resources, (March 2014):37–41, 2003. URLhttp://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/716100620.Tourism Resources Company. An Ambition for Forest Cycling and MountainBiking Towards a National Strategy. Technical Report December, 2005.Shiro Tsuyuzaki. Ski slope vegetation in central Honshu, Japan. Environ-mental Management, 19(5):773–777, September 1995. ISSN 0364-152X.doi: 10.1007/BF02471959. URL http://link.springer.com/10.1007/BF02471959.Peter Varley and Dominic Medway. Ecosophy and tourism: Rethink-ing a mountain resort. Tourism Management, 32(4):902–911, August2011. ISSN 02615177. doi: 10.1016/j.tourman.2010.08.005. URL http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0261517710001639.Vincent Vle`s. Du moderne au pastiche: l’urbanisme des stations demontagne en questions. halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr, 1:39–48, 2010.URL http://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/68/14/91/DOC/Dumoderne-au-pastiche2.doc.Vincent Vle`s. Ski resorts in crisis and territorial construction in French Cat-alonia Inter-municipal management of tourism resources has the debatebeen hijacked? Revue de ge´ographie alpine/Journal of Alpine Research,2(100):1–11, 2012.124Nicholas S G Williams, Amy K Hahs, and John W Morgan. A dispersal-constrained habitat suitability model for predicting invasion of alpinevegetation. Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological So-ciety of America, 18(2):347–59, March 2008. ISSN 1051-0761. URLhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18488601.Peter W. Williams, Robert W. Penrose, and Suzanne Hawkes. Shareddecision-making in tourism land use planning. Annals of TourismResearch, 25(4):860–889, October 1998. ISSN 01607383. doi: 10.1016/S0160-7383(98)00037-1. URL http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0160738398000371.J. Wysocki. The Environment Has No Standing in Environmental Gover-nance. Organization & Environment, 25(1):25–38, February 2012. ISSN1086-0266. doi: 10.1177/1086026611436215. URL http://oae.sagepub.com/cgi/doi/10.1177/1086026611436215.Robert K Yin. Case Study Research: Design and Methods, volume 5. 2009.ISBN 9781412960991. doi: 10.1097/FCH.0b013e31822dda9e. URL http://books.google.com/books?id=FzawIAdilHkC&pgis=1.125Appendix AExample of keyword tableThis table shows the amount of keywords with their occurences for the lastcoding pass in the Whistler case study.CCF(59)environment(38)mountainbiking(37)access(33)values(31)forestry-vs-tourism(26)nature-perception(24)quality-of-life(24)forest-management(24)municipality(23)boundaries-expansion(18)economic-opport.(17)community(17)conscious-action(17)golf(17)control(16)year-round-employt.(15)summer(14)multi-use(13)awareness(13)education(12)RMI(12)logging(11)limit-to-growth(11)visuals(10)equity(10)life-style(10)people-ubiquity(9)EBM(8)stability(8)conflict(7)real-estate(7)scrutiny(7)recreation-companies(7)location(7)impact(6)sacrifice(5)marketing(5)village(5)climate-change(5)tourism(5)government(5)OCP(5)trails(4)housing(4)lift-company(4)number(4)involvement(4)organic-development(4)timing(4)old-growth(4)monitoring(3)peak-to-peak(3)engagement(3)shoulder-season(3)business-sustainability(3)hiking(3)BCparks(3)culture(3)milltown(3)alpine(3)chicken-egg(3)employees-quality(3)amenities(3)visibility(2)AAC(2)second-home-owners(2)demographics(2)beyond-gvt-regulations(2)valley-trail(2)forestry-vs-logging(2)resort-survival(2)strong-ecosystem(2)snow-protection(2)carrying-capacity(2)fire-management(2)NIMBY(2)highway(2)shift(2)self-regulation(2)locals-vs-tourists(2)regional-vs-destination(2)individual(1)muni-bike-friendly(1)126Appendix A. Example of keyword tablepower(1)multi-users(1)history(1)rogue-trails(1)logging-visibility(1)winter(1)double-edged-sword(1)motorized-vs-non(1)middle-class-community(1)events(1)cliche(1)stakeholders(1)destination-vs-local(1)mountainbike-resort(1)value-added-forestry(1)downhill-m.biking(1)recreation-groups(1)balance(1)bed-community(1)management(1)global-economy(1)community-involvement(1)opportunities(1)people-concentration(1)history-repeats-Jumbo(1)skiing-decline(1)127Appendix BConsent form for interviewsHow does a change in seasonal management of a mountain resortinfluence the way the surrounding forest is managed?This research is being led by Dr. John Innes of the Faculty of Forestryat the University of British Columbia, and is being conducted by ArnaudDe Grave as part of his MSc degree. You are being invited to take partin this study, as we believe that you, as a stakeholder in your community,have knowledge of the subject area described below as a stakeholder in yourcommunity.The research project seeks to understand how a shift from winter-basedto year-round tourism affects mountain resorts, focusing on forest manage-ment and community welfare. The existing body of tourism research thatexamines seasonality tends to focus exclusively on economics. We are gath-ering information from resorts that have already changed, in order to developguidelines that can be used to support this transition. In the case of a re-sort that is primarily winter-based, we are seeking your opinion about thepotential effects of transitioning the business to year-round.This research aims at identifying opportunities, pitfalls and proposingguidelines to help communities perform the business shift, should it be con-sidered beneficial.During this semi-structured (i.e. conversational) interview we will askyou seven questions in order to gather technical information and opinionsabout the effect of the shift on forest management and community wel-fare. We will also gather some demographic data to help us interpret thedata from the interviews. The interview is confidential: you will not beidentified personally in the report/manuscript. There may be additionalfollow-up/clarification by email unless otherwise stated. However, in therare event where we would feel it appropriate to use a quote from you, wewill first contact you and seek separate consent for this particular purpose.128Appendix B. Consent form for interviewsThe results of this study will be reported in a graduate thesis and may alsobe published in journal articles and books.The interview will be recorded (audio only) and the resulting files will bestored on an encrypted and password protected folder on a computer (plusa back-up external hard-drive, also encrypted and password protected).Would you require more information or have any questions about thisstudy please feel free to contact me (Arnaud De Grave, contact informationat the bottom of this page.)If you have any concerns about your rights as a research subject and/oryour experiences while participating in this study, you may contact the Re-search Subject Information Line in the UBC Office of Research Services at604-822-8598 or if long distance e-mail RSIL@ors.ubc.ca or call toll free 1-877-822-8598.Taking part in this study is entirely up to you. You have the right torefuse to participate in this study. If you decide to take part, you may chooseto pull out of the study at any time without giving a reason and withoutany negative impact on you.• Your signature below indicates that you have received a copy of thisconsent form for your own records.• Your signature indicates that you consent to participate in this study.129Appendix CGraphs of keywords frominterviews, per case studies130Whistlermountainbiking(37)valley-trail(2)motorized-vs-non(1)RMI(12)awareness(13)trails(4)recreation-groups(1)hiking(3)logging-visibility(1)year-round-employment(15)fire-management(2)beyond-gvt-regulations(2)multi-users(1)community-involvement(1)global-economy(1)destination-vs-local(1)NIMBY(2)double-edged-sword(1)logging(11)community(17)AAC(2)real-estate(7)number(4)village(5)limit-to-growth(11)winter(1)EBM(8)recreation-companies(7)individual(1)visuals(10)environment(38)government(5)visibility(2)lift-company(4)quality-of-life(24)highway(2)locals-vs-tourists(2)economic-opportunities(17)rogue-trails(1)engagement(3)control(16)education(12)events(1)resort-survival(2) regional-vs-destination(2)amenities(3)old-growth(4)marketing(5)conflict(7)employees-quality(3)monitoring(3)municipality-bike-friendly(1)life-style(10)access(33)management(1)shift(2)middle-class-community(1)organic-development(4)tourism(5)location(7)forestry-vs-logging(2)boundaries-expansion(18)housing(4)milltown(3)alpine(3)power(1)people-ubiquity(9)history(1)involvement(4)golf(17)peak-to-peak(3)value-added-forestry(1)multi-use(13)strong-ecosystem(2)self-regulation(2)OCP(5)scrutiny(7)summer(14)sacrifice(5)forestry-vs-tourism(26)history-repeats-Jumbo(1)downhill-mountainbiking(1)climate-change(5)nature-perception(24)business-sustainability(3)balance(1)snow-protection(2)CCF(59)equity(10)demographics(2)values(31)mountainbike-resort(1)opportunities(1)shoulder-season(3)skiing-decline(1)stability(8)culture(3)conscious-action(17)municipality(23)people-concentration(1)forest-management(24)stakeholders(1)BCparks(3)timing(4)carrying-capacity(2)impact(6)second-home-owners(2)chicken-egg(3)bed-community(1)cliche(1)Hemlock Valleyconflict(2)mountainbiking(2)growth(1)life-style(1)weight(1)attract-young-families(1)management(1)real-estate(1)traffic(1)investment(2)expectations(1)potential(7)environmentalists(1)incentives(2)residents(1)RMI(1)equity(1)tourism(1)bedroom-community(2)location(12)visuals(7)trails(1)government(7)numbers(4)seasonality(1)year-round-employment(3)lift-company(3)no-municipality(1)quality-of-life(6)housing(1)motorized-recreation(2)milltown(8)logging-roads(4)government-involvement(4)forestry-vs-tourism(4)paving-the-road(5)logging(1)lease-removal(2)avalanche-mitigation(1)competition(1)governance(1)communication(2)serinity(1)golf(1)municipality(4)too-late(1)multi-use(3)forest-management(13)events(3)amenities(3)timing(1)conscious-prevention(1)marketing(2)proposal(1)impact(2)go-with-the-flow(1)environment(2)consultation(4)community(8)OCP(1)economic-opportunity(7)master-plan(2)disconnection(1)local-government(1)personal-reasons(3)Mount Washingtonconflict(1)mountainbiking(2)resort-company(2)access(1)real-estate(2)funding-issue(1)impacts(4)relationship(1)bus-shuttle(1)village(2)density(2)BCpark-proximity(12)location(3)visuals(1)government(8)partnership(1)boundaries-expansion(1)year-round-employment(1)quality-of-life(3)logging-roads(1)paving-the-road(4)multi-season(1)recreation-use(1)incentive(3)private-land(4)conscious-action(2)municipality(2)stakeholder-involvement(1)education(1)forest-management(3)investment(1)timing(2)pride(1)restrictions(1)destination-vs-local(1)zipline(1)environment(2)chicken-egg(1)lack-of(1)community(3)logging(1)economic-opportunity(1)potential(1)Sun Peaksrecreation-amenities(1)mountainbiking(1)resort-company(5)school(8)ISO-14001(3)conflict(1)destination-resort(1)real-estate(3)employees-quality(1)impact(4)life-style(2)transparency(1)RMI(7)equity(1)expansion(1)awareness(2)location(3)visuals(6)scrutiny(3)government(7)numbers(3)boundaries-expansion(1)snow-protection(1)year-round-employment(3)visibility(2)quality-of-life(2)housing(1)milltown(3)logging-roads(1)power(6)education(1)community-engagement(2)communication(5)golf(2)conscious-action(2)municipality(23)seasonality(1)ec-companies(1)community-involvement(1)fire(2)forestry-vs-tourism(2)forest-management(12)events(7)investment(1)logging-companies(3)CF(1)self-regulation(1)retirement-destination(1)taxes(1)marketing(9)economic-viability(1)sense-of-community(13)environment(6)economic-opportunities(3)control-recreation-boundaries(1)conferences(1)above-regular-standard(1)draw(1)master-plan(1)


Citation Scheme:


Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics



Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            async >
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:


Related Items