Another perspective is from the photo accompanying the story. With due consideration to the perspective above, this perspective shows an almost miniscule 'bridge' between two much large chunks of habitat. It is a very graphic illustration of the 'change' that occurs with the development of these linear projects (i.e., rail, road, utilities, etc.). The impact assessment would have identified geotechnical hazards, soil capability for reclamation, critical habitat, sensitive features, historical use, among other parameters and designed and located the 'bridge' at a highly suited position along the length. But one could not argue that this still means a fence, and a rather constricted travel corridor for those highly mobile and wide ranging species (moose, elk, bear, cougar, wolf, etc.). It would be not different than your wide open field that had a central path constructed across it and a fence from preventing you from experiencing the forest and nature. For wildlife, it brings limitation into their home. Altered travel patterns can possibly contribute to an adjustment in energy balances, increased susceptibility to predation, or the removal of access to some important habitat features. But it is a mitigated alternative, particularly since for many decades, such consideration was not given. The railway and other parts of the transportation corridor through the park west of Calgary remains as significant contributors to grizzly mortalities and mitigation has not been very effective. Whether we are fully conscious of it or not, our touch to the earth has consequences - ones we can either accept or not accept. These decisions we keep making become increasingly less transparent as the population expands. The quote below is all too true, so in the meantime, enjoy your day.
US writer (1962 - )
Bridging the killing field in Banff
No comments:
Post a Comment