The Jumbo question was put in the not important role by both local newspapers with regards to the local elections. I would like to see them print the above letter in their publications – but don’t count on it as what they print and say is controlled by advertizing dollars. This is why E news is so important – it is the media where the public voice can be heard.

I am so relieved that so many voters agree that we want our community to be a good place to live rather than business at any cost.

Thank goodness we have had elected officials willing to stand up to contractors, developers, and building suppliers to ensure that development costs are paid by the developer up front. Can you imagine the mess we would be in now if this had not been the case? Kinda like the mess the province will be in if Jumbo is given approval.

Reply

I find it ironic that the very points our “valley leaders” are presenting as arguments for the resort, are the reasons why the resorts shouldn’t go ahead. The ski industry has been in decline, international tourism is in decline, real estate development and sales are in decline, the restaurant and bar industry is in decline… yet somehow a ski ski resort in a region flooded with ski resorts that don’t operate at capacity is the answer?

Comparing it to the icefields and Lake Louise is absurd, Jumbo does not have the access or the population base to be the destination the proponent needs to make it sustainable. And after he sells off all these private residences from public land, packs up and leaves, we will be stuck with yet another ski resort that does not attain capacity and along the way, it will be us, the taxpayers, not the developer, who will be on the hook for infrastructure costs and maintenance.

If this project was sustainable, if it made sense and if it had public support, we wouldn’t be having this discussion twenty years later. These ‘leaders’ do not represent the majority of the voting public in our region. Lets call this proposal exactly what it is… frivolous. This is a land grab, land the proponent doesn’t even have to pay for to profit from it. This is our land, this is public land, and the decision should be made by the public. If the proponent and these ‘leaders’ are so certain that this proposal is best for the public and for the region, let them decide.

Steve
Kimberley, BC

Reply

Also, people who think that naysayers are just saying no just to say no. Think about it. Yes it’ll create money.. but for whom and for how long? Until the beauty of the Jumbo glacier is destroyed, until the Grizzly become extinct because their land that they live in and migrate through has been taken away. Which will then push them into the communities and then they’ll be killed because they become a nuisance to the surrounding cities, like it’s their fault they have had their homes taken away from them. Until the water becomes even more unusable because it’s been contaminated by chemicals and garbage put there by tourists who come for the view but don’t care to take care of it as they do so. Ever hear of the song .. “They pave paradise and put up a parking lot?.. Put a tree in a tree museum and charge people a dollar and a half to see them” Pretty lyrics? Or, trying to get you to see that this type of development isn’t worth the price we’re going to pay later! Open your eyes! This world isn’t going to last forever if we take everything it has to offer and exploit it to the point of breaking just for more money, more money, more money. You can’t eat money, you can’t breathe money, you can’t drink money. But you can drink the water that comes from a Glacier if it’s left untouched and doing what it’s meant to be doing.

Reply

It’s about time that the REAL leaders of the Columbia Valley community should write a letter to Clark. The Working people, the Next generations, The First Nations people all combined. The fact that these ‘leaders’ think they have a right to speak on behalf of people who have very capable voices all on their own only shows their true colours; Liars and cheats. Betting that the community is too stupid, or ignorant enough not to notice! It’s time to step up and demand that our real voices are heard. If we talk about it but don’t do something about it then they win by no contest. Let’s give them a contest.

Reply

A lot of emotion in the above statements, which just goes to show how controversial the Jumbo issue remains to be. The proponent responded to an opportunity, something many of us do and have done in our lives. The proponent has, over twenty years played by the rules in place at the time, that were and are applicable to projects of this kind. We only have to wear these shoes for a brief moment to realize that if we were in same boat we would want to know the outcome. The proponent and the people affected by the decision deserve an answer.

Reply

I think the letter shows that there is in fact strong support from many leaders in the area.
Be they elected, business, First Nations or otherwise these folks have proven that they are either capable of garnering votes, or being successful at running businesses in the Valley.
It would seem to me that the economic argument posed against Jumbo fails to resonate with the people who actually have to make money.
If it was going to take away from existing resorts, why would they support it?
If the investors didn’t think that they would be able to recoup their dollars, why would they bother?
This isn’t something that the local (and otherwise) naysayers seem to consider.
And what about the fact that Jumbo has had industry present for years?
Mining and forestry (including “glading”), as well as snowmobiles and heliskiiers have been there all along.
Opposition funded and organized by outside groups seems to draw in many vocal “againstavists” who happily chime in to give the appearance of local unity.
They are more than happy to tell everyone else how they should conduct themselves, without having to bear the consequences of their actions.
This resort will create something that will be a draw for tourists and locals alike, due to the fact that it is such an incredible departure from what is commonly offered in BC, or North America for that matter.
It snows in Jumbo!
Let Jumbo Fly!

Reply

I can’t believe this is still going on for over 20 years?! As someone born and raised in the valley, worked in economic development there, and continue to work in the field and in tourism, and having watched the Jumbo concept be presented and pushed and thrown around, I wonder where all the resources come from to continue to push this along? How does someone from ‘Edmonton’ become a leader in the valley? And as was already commented, what makes these 16 ‘leaders’? Leaders have follower’s; whose following them?

This development proposed 5000 pillows at full build out when the idea was proposed 20 years ago – is that still the concept? Then I thought, That’s more pillows than the population of Invermere. And I also thought, how much economic benefit is really going to be gained by the businesses and residents of the Windermere / Columbia Valley? Visitors and residents of Panorama more often brought in their own groceries, furniture and fixtures instead of buying local; and with Jumbo even further from the Valley than Panorama, what was the valley really to gain. Certainly Jumbo would fly or truck their supplies in directly from a major centre, again by-passing valley retailers / suppliers.

Further, until the Land Question is settled, how can a Band (and its corporation) that claims a part of the traditional lands of the Ktunaxa, whose history is less than 200 years in the area, be considered a ‘first’ First Nation? The Band involved in the support letter is more of an interest group, especially since there is an Impact Benefits Agreement now signed; whether this Band represents originators of the lands is questionable (but certainly there are Band members that are Ktunaxa). So let’s assume that this ‘group’ of Band members that support the development are claiming traditional rights may be valid, they still only represent less than 10 percent of the Ktunaxa nation citizenship. Not enough to justify “First Nations” support.

Bottom line – is the development of a major resort on a pristine area really in the best interest of the land and resources, environment, people, businesses, and population of BC that will be bailing this resort out when it ‘inevitably’ fails (as most resorts do – even Whistler/Blackcomb months before the 2010 Winter Olympics).

Reply

You know that whole global movement called the OCCUPY movement??? Know how you might think it has nothing to do with small town communities, way out in the Kootenays…well the SECRET 16 just outed themselves are your local 1%…these are service industry jobs-JUST OVER BROKE-where are the ‘services’ to support the participation in the local economy then? Child care???? how are your kids doing over there? health care access??? hows the education system??? oh right, those are suffering people leaving, and so with that thinking, this economic venture would need to include the social aspects of such an economic stimulus plan because if you are looking to support families, you are going to need quality child care to start, which you don’t have, and not just nice buildings…and that is only the beginning…

Reply

I cannot believe these leaders are trying to go forward with Jumbo. From my point of view it looks like it’s only wanted by people who stand to benefit something. Whether it’s dollar figures or just publicity for some, this should not go through! Whenever I visit family in the Invermere/Radium area, none speak of seeing this go through. I believe we have enough resorts as it is. Once the glacier disappears than what? Keep building till you have no resources to work with. I am not an environmentalist, or anything like that. I just enjoy the outdoors with my children on yearly visits to the Kootenays. With high hopes that they too will enjoy the outdoors with their children.

Reply

I find it very interesting that the majority of those that signed the letter are not elected officials of the Columbia Valley, that represent the people, but rather business people with self serving interests. I have worked in local government for over 17 years, 14 of those years in Invermere, and the one thing that I have always heard is the need for openness and public participation. The issue of Jumbo has never been open and there has been minimal public participation.

Mayor Taft hit it bang on when he said “The fact remains that the people of Invermere and the Columbia Valley have never had the opportunity to comment on the future land uses in the Jumbo Valley as would be legally required in any other real estate development in the province. If the province and the authors of the letter would like to hear what the residents of Invermere and the Columbia Valley feel on the proposed Jumbo Glacier Ski Resort, than allow the land uses to be discussed and voted on by local government, with the normal processes for public hearings being followed,”

I do not believe that the Province will act in the best interest of the people of the Columbia Valley if allowed to make land use decisions over the local government.

Reply

Wow, no self interest in that group.That’s what qualifies as leadership these days? So very sad.

Reply

Business as usual.
Economic development at any cost.
I can think of twenty other worthwhile projects that this valley could undertake as a solidified group that would benefit us all and not divide so many people on a contentious issue like Jumbo.
Sneaky!
PP

Reply

This would be funny, if it wasn’t so outrageously ignorant. How dare the following claim to be “community leaders”! A better description for some of them would be parasites and opportunists, and that is being kind.

Reply

I think the rest of the resorts in the Kootenay’s should be running at capacity before we destroy something that can’t be un-destroyed to please the few who have the disposable income to attend such luxury resorts such as what is being proposed.

Reply