There exists only 17 weeks of data regarding use of the Tangle Creek vicinity by mountain goats and bighorn sheep, and no data concerning overall populations and trends. Brewster Transportation estimates that 250,000 people could visit its proposed structure annually, an increase of 277 percent over present visitation. Skywalk tickets are expected to cost between $15.00 and $30.00. If half of the projected visitors paid for the thrill-walk, Brewster Transportation's gross annual revenue from the site would fall between $1,875,000 and $3,750,000. The project budget is estimated at $12 million. Brewster Transportation could be printing money at this site in less than four years.

Stacks Image 214
You need only a modest acquaintance with the Canadian Rockies to sense that the environs of the viewpoint offer habitat for bighorn sheep and mountain goats. The animals use the ledges at the viewpoint as well as the canyon below and the cliffs above. The bighorn sheep move between Tangle Creek, north of the viewpoint, and the river flats south of the viewpoint. The mountain goats frequent the cliffs of Wilcox Peak. As a consequence, members of both species are often on the road in the vicinity. They also spend a great deal of time on the ledge on the canyon-side of the fencing and wall at the viewpoints. This strip of gravel is littered with their dung.
Stacks Image 215
Yes, the viewpoint and environs are human-disturbed areas, but the viewpoint is patently wildlife habitat, and who can say what vital pieces of the seasonal habitat puzzle that ledge, the cliffs above and below, and the adjacent river flats may represent? When will we stop insisting that wildlife species have to adapt to human behaviour and to human desires in the Rocky Mountain national parks? And when will the Parks Canada Agency consistently have the gumption to fix problems such as wildlife kills, with careful science and study, rather than opting to "partner with business" in quick-fix, vested interest solutions? What's wrong with flat-out saying "no" when a proponent pitches such an outlandish, insensitive idea?