Liricon Capital Inc., the lead private sector backer, is touting it as a hydrogen-powered transportation solution with lower greenhouse gas emissions than driving. The company says it has received support from municipalities and the tourism industry, but the Alberta government told the Globe and Mail it won’t invest in the $1.5 billion train as it is because the financial risks are too great. Environmental groups — including the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society, Yellowstone to Yukon and Bow Valley Naturalists — and some scientists say the proposal also has environmental risks. “This is one of the most important conservation landscapes in North America,” said Tony Clevenger, senior wildlife researcher at the Western Transportation Institute at Montana State University, from Banff, Alta. “It also happens to be one of the busiest in terms of transport infrastructure. “The thought of this new rail line, which would be very close to the existing rail line, is really disturbing — not just in the park, but outside the park on provincial lands and in Stoney Nakoda (First Nations) as well.” Concerns include wildlife deaths along the rail line — particularly grizzly bears, which have been struck and killed on the existing line — and the fragmentation of wildlife habitat in Alberta’s already busy Bow Valley. Biologist Colleen Cassady St. Clair in Banff National Park in late June. St. Clair has studied using technology such as lighting or sound to warn animals of approaching trains and reduce wildlife deaths on tracks. (Molly Segal) Josh Welsh, Alberta’s Yellowstone to Yukon program manager, said taking passengers to Banff isn’t a bad idea. “We see this as a means to potentially deliver a sustainable transport vision that could work for wildlife, people and the planet,” he said. But, he added, there isn’t enough information or collaboration to know if it works for wildlife. “The Bow Valley is already under pressure from development.” A recent report by the Canmore, Alta.-based organization found that the mountain town’s footprint has grown fivefold in 50 years. He focused on grizzly bears because “if you take care of grizzlies, you take care of a lot of other things.” Another report by scientists, published this spring in the journal Movement Ecology, found that bears have lost about 85 percent of their original habitat in the Bow Valley. “So when you’re talking about another piece of linear infrastructure, which a train line is ΓǪ, we’re talking about cutting off habitat, disconnecting wildlife,” Welsh said. Devon Earle, a conservation specialist with Alberta Wildlife, said the Calgary-based agency has similar concerns. “We don’t think there’s been enough consideration of how wildlife will be affected,” he said. He also questions whether a train would actually reduce cars on the freeway, saying bus service might be more cost-effective. Liricon said Parks Canada should consider raising the entrance fee to Banff National Park for private passenger vehicles and expanding bus and shuttle service between park attractions. Parks Canada said in a statement that its first priority is protecting the ecological integrity of national parks, but “is not currently considering a proposal for a passenger railway in Banff National Park.” Any review, he added, would look at policy and legislation, including the Impact Assessment Act and park priorities. Jan Watrous, managing partner of Liricon, said a study shows the train could carry about 11 million passengers a year and reduce highway traffic. “The fact that the passenger train will be a zero-emission hydrogen train and will significantly reduce ΓǪ vehicular traffic means that human and wildlife mortality on highways will be dramatically reduced,” he said. “The specifics of the hydrogen solution and wildlife mitigations will be determined through consultation.” The company said it is considering using technology such as lighting or sound to warn animals of approaching trains and reduce wildlife deaths on the tracks. Colleen Cassady St. Clair, a biologist at the University of Alberta, said she spoke to Liricon about this idea, which came out of some research she led. Although early tests show it may be effective for some wildlife, he said “there’s a lot of untested ground in a warning-based system.” St. Clair said there could also be challenges with wildlife crossing structures that go over or under the tracks. Clevenger, who specializes in wildlife crossings, said he heard the company was looking at underpasses to align with those under the Trans-Canada Highway in Banff National Park. “This is too simplistic and completely unattainable,” he said. “You can’t put an underpass on the new rail line without putting an underpass on the main line (Canadian Pacific Railway). You’d have to do both.” Clevenger said the measure would reduce already-threatened wildlife habitat. A passenger train, he added, could end up increasing overall traffic to the national park. “It’s a landscape that’s just overflowing with people,” he said. “I don’t think they can handle it.”
