Roads are the primary culprits in many of our present-day environmental troubles. Urban sprawl, habitat fragmentation, reduction in air and water quality, and species declines can all be attributed to road construction and associated human activity. Maintaining natural landscapes and healthy wildlife populations in some of our last great places will require more environmentally sensitive road planning and construction. This goal will only be attained through cooperation between wildlife biologists, local land use planners, and highway departments. Highway planning isn’t just for engineers anymore.

In few places is the road issue more pressing than in the Rocky Mountains of the northern U.S. and Canada. This unique ecoregion is one of few in North America where the full complement of native predators still survives. The constant influx of people into this region, however, has created a boom in road construction during recent years, threatening to sever habitat connectivity for several of these treasured animals. Conservationists have fought for greater consideration of wildlife in planned road projects across the region including those at Togwotee Pass in Wyoming, Highway 93 and Bozeman Pass in Montana, and expansion of the TransCanada Highway through Banff National Park, to name just a few.

Massive crossing structures in Banff and plans for unprecedented levels of wildlife mitigation on Highway 93 through the Flathead Reservation in Montana demonstrate that the thinking behind highway planning is beginning to shift. But these are unique cases. Conservation interests don’t often enjoy the power over highway departments held by a national park or a tribal nation. Instead, road projects on public lands frequently resemble reckless joyrides across our prized landscapes. To protect our natural resources more fully, we need to rethink the way we make decisions about road construction.

Current plans to expand Highway 3 through the Crowsnest Pass region of southern Alberta present a valuable opportunity to study the transportation decision-making process. Highway 3, now a two-lane arterial road, runs east and west directly across one of the narrowest segments of the Rocky Mountains. The provincial government and numerous economic interests favor upgrading the road to Canada’s National Highway Standards in order to provide increased trade capacity. However, wildlife biologists and conservationists fear that expansion of this road to a divided four-lane highway will further fracture large carnivore connectivity through this critical region, imperiling smaller populations south of the highway. Although road construction is still two decades off, the current decision will have major impacts on local land use planning.

As a graduate affiliate of NRCC this past summer, I conducted policy research on the present decision-making process being carried out by the Alberta government. My goal was to build a comprehensive understanding of the case by identifying the major stakeholders, their goals, the underlying socio-economic forces behind the decision, and any shortcomings in the process itself. Over the course of the summer, I traveled the region interviewing stakeholders from Jackson, Wyoming, to Edmonton, Alberta. I spoke with people representing a diverse group of interests including several national parks, the Alberta government, planning engineers, conservation organizations, industry, and local citizens, among others. I was pleased to find that, regardless of their position on the issue, most individuals I contacted were quite willing to share their views.

With many potentially unwanted impacts, including damage to internationally significant wildlife resources as well as to the local economy, community, and water supply, there is a serious need for an open and comprehensive evaluation of the costs and benefits of the project. To date, however, the process has not met these standards and reaction to the highway plans from the public and conservation groups has been disorganized and diffuse.

Public participation in the decision process has been limited to a series of open houses held locally in the Crowsnest Pass. Though Alberta Transportation and its consultants have requested public comment, many participants were frustrated with what they perceived as an “inform and proceed” model of decision-making. As one local citizen stated, “It doesn’t matter what we say. They’re just going to put the highway wherever they want to put it.” Others expressed dissatisfaction with the government’s strict adherence to National Highway Standards which many feel are insensitive to the local topography and social-economic circumstances.

Most local citizens and groups want to see the existing Highway 3 improved, but only in a manner that takes into account the unique resources and communities of the Crowsnest Pass. Currently, there is widespread agreement that viable alternatives to the government’s plan exist. With frustrations running high, there is a valuable opportunity for conservation groups, local businesses, historic preservation societies, citizen groups, and even the municipal government to coalesce around this issue to force the Alberta government to reconsider the manner by which it makes transportation decisions. Unfortunately, participation in this ongoing decision process remains disjointed.

Recent studies in road ecology have clearly demonstrated the effects of roads on wildlife and ecosystems. Yet, the ability of citizens and conservationists to engage effectively in transportation decisions has not developed as quickly as our understanding of their social and ecological impacts. As development intensifies, bridging this gap will be an important step toward protecting the wild nature of the Rocky Mountains for future generations.