Special Report Wildlife vs. People Ottawa makes the correct decision By CATHERINE FORD Southam National Columnist It was a loud and clear "stop" by the only government with the authority to do so; the only government able to say "no" to further development of Banff National Park. It was also a clear message that the federal government believes that unfettered business development is not how Canadians want to run their country, their resources and their lives. Those of us watching in horror as development creeps across the landscape from Calgary, snaking and crawling across the grasslands, replacing hills with houses and scenery with gas stations are grateful that somebody, finally, said enough. Canadians who have seen the tourist-trap horrors of Niagara Falls and what development has done to the natural beauty of Vancouver, don't need to be so-called environmentalists to want someone in authority to issue the halt order. It may make Banff an exclusive enclave for the rich and famous. (It may also give rise to stricter controls over the "need to reside" laws and some innovative thinking on the question of pricing Banff out of a Canadian market.) But Banff doesn't need to go the way of Aspen. At least, today, it isn't going the way of Disneyland, either. Putting a halt to further development is a costly decision for the federal government. When Deputy Prime Minister Sheila Copps said Monday: "Starting immediately, no new land will be made available for commercial development in Banff National Park," she closed the book for promoters, developers and operators who see tourism in the Rockies as the setting for their personal feast. There will be anger and outrage --and further development outside Banff Park. The ramifications are obvious: unless the provincial government takes tough action to block development, the corridor between Calgary and the Banff gates could one day become a northern version of the Florida coast -- an endless strip of motels and gas stations. Already, the town of Canmore is exploding, and the depressing sight of row housing lining the northern flank of the trans-Canada heralds a new age of conspicuous development. At least, the federal government sees past the immediate return on development to the price that's paid for paving paradise. It's not that we don't have examples. Driving past the sweep of Lac Des Arc, I always wonder which will come first: the complete development of the Calgary-Banff corridor, or the total eradication of the mountain that has fed the cement plant at Exshaw for more years than I can remember. Maybe the plant has become so much a part of the scenery that nobody ever makes the connection -- this is what the fate of our wilderness could have been, if left to the mercies of untrammeled development. Once that mountain is gone, it will never rise again. Yet those in favor of development in the national park have not asked for a free hand. Their arguments have been calm and logical, many based on the expansion that has already taken place, on the fact that barely five per cent of the area is occupied, with the rest left in its pristine state; on the need for services for the five million tourists that represent more than $700 million in revenue in the park itself. And, looking at the state of Banff townsite, at the crowding and the congested streets, it would be easy to believe that easing the seams of the town would solve some of the problems. The town is already there, after all, so what's a few more ski hills, another hotel or so, another golf course, in the great scheme of things? Both sides make sense to the majority of Canadians who are unaligned, who have no particular stake in Banff, other than that of the Canadian who recognizes a valuable natural resource and gives thanks for its beauty and accessibility. But Canada's oldest national park isn't owned by the people of Alberta, the businessmen and women of Calgary or the backwoods hikers and environmentalists. It's owned by all of us. Sometimes those on the two extremes of this argument forget this. That's why the cautious middle road that sets rules and limits, but also allows room for everyone, was the only choice the federal government could make. (Catherine Ford can be reached by e-mail at fordc@theherald.southam.ca)