Parks Canada forges ahead without MOE
Monday, 23 January 2012 00:00
by Lyonel Doherty
National park advocates aren’t giving up despite the BC Ministry of Environment announcing that it’s not supporting the concept at this time.
Doreen Olson from the South Okanagan Similkameen National Park Network admitted she was very disappointed when Minister Terry Lake announced that the province wasn’t supporting the park initiative. But she read Lake’s letter again and stressed that he didn’t say no in terms of provincial support.
“It means they are just not ready to agree to a park at this time.”
But Grasslands Park Review Coalition spokesman Greg Norton said the province never stated support for a national park in the first place.
Norton stated the province did sign a memorandum of understanding with the federal government almost nine years ago. This understanding was simply to examine the feasability of a national park in this area, he noted.
“We are not surprised by the Ministry of Environment’s view on this. Our coalition has raised legitimate and serious concerns on this issue for eight years.”
Norton said the coalition is pleased to see the province has recognized those concerns and recognizes there is not enough public support to go further. “This is something we’ve been saying for eight years.”
Olson said Parks Canada is working with First Nations to get their feedback on the park.
“The fact that Parks Canada is still going forward with park establishment tells me they are not giving up.”
Osoyoos Indian Band Chief Clarence Louie was asked for his position on the park. He said the project is still under “feasibility” so the band doesn’t have an official position.
“In every community there are people for an issue and those against. I do not have positions on issues that are still under review.”
In a letter to Olson, Lake said the province recognizes the important conservation values in the South Okanagan area, including some of the most ecologically valuable grasslands in BC.
“While the feasibility study determined a national park reserve was feasible and there was some support, it also recognized there was a large contingent of people opposed to the initiative.”
Lake said the province considers public support as critical in the transfer of lands for protected park status. “In this case, the province is not convinced there is enough local support to move forward with this proposal at this time.”
Richard Carson, Director of Western Establishment Initiatives for Parks Canada, said they agree that public support for the park concept is very important.
Carson noted they have reduced the size of the park proposal, and are now focused on a much smaller area that is rich in natural and cultural values, yet potentially threatened by land use change.
He said collaborative work with southern bands of the Okanagan First Nation has built shared understandings, and common interest in protecting the land for future generations.
Carson also noted they will continue to work with local ranching families to address the concerns and interests they have raised.
The bottom line is the proposed national park provides an invaluable opportunity to conserve and present one of Canada’s iconic natural landscapes, Carson said.
“It would facilitate unique and inspiring visitor experiences and provide a living legacy for future generations.”
But he acknowledged that the best places are sometimes the hardest because of competing interests, and on-going changes in land use.
Olson agreed, saying the National Park Network is very concerned with the changes to the landscape.
“Every day we see increasing development that is slowly but surely harming the ecological integrity of this region.”
Olson said the situation is urgent as vineyards and urban encroachment continue to advance through both valleys and vulnerable/endangered ecosystems and species are being harmed.
“There is also a need to manage outdoor recreation as the intensity of use, and inappropriate use, is increasing.”
But opponents fear many things will be lost if a park is established, such as forestry and mining operations, ranching, cattle grazing, hunting and other recreational activities.
They argue there will be an economic loss if ranching and helicopter flight training are eliminated. And the elimination of hunting will result in a negative impact on vineyards and orchards because of deer and bear damage. In addition, opponents fear the lack of cattle grazing will increase the threat of wildfire.
Olson said the large working ranches are at a vulnerable stage and simply must stay intact to accomplish the ecological vision envisaged through the feasibility study process.
“We understand that a number of the key ranchers in the study area are interested in negotiating their future with Parks Canada officials.”
Latest News
-
Editorial - RCMP response times queried It’s very difficult in these economic times to succeed in business, especially for new entrepreneurs. And being victimized by thieves only adds to the struggle. That’s why we sympathize with business...
-
Local volunteers given royal treatment by IH Kaye Marie Yuckin (left) and Lilian Burgess dig into the food during a volunteer appreciation luncheon hosted by Interior Health at the Oliver Community Centre on April 18. Lyonel Doherty photo ...
-
SOSS rebuild to start soon with funding Students Sierra Hammond (left) and Kiera Heinrichs are happy with the new SOSS rebuild plans, which include a new 397-seat theatre to replace the old Frank Venables Auditorium. Lyonel Doherty photo...
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4