Province downplays public support for National Park

pentona
Übergod
Posts: 1796
Joined: Feb 21st, 2011, 4:38 pm

Re: Province downplays public support for National Park

Post by pentona »

rustled wrote:Another good point, but let's not create a bigger problem trying to prevent that.

Keep in mind there are already quite a few people trying to prevent that sort of thing, people who want the backyard they share respected by all and for all the right reasons.

Incidentally, most of the small fraction of people busted for the wrongdoing that goes on in busy national parks are not caught by parks staff, they're caught because they're dumbasses on social media. Giving fewer locals legitimate access to the area is another problem with instituting a national park. Staff simply cannot manage the volumes of tourists in busy national parks.


Good points, rustled. Anyone who is pushing for a National Park in the South Okn, especially Mount Kobau better go take a look at it now. Its far from Pristine Wilderness. The fire last year took a huge toll on the forest; massive amounts of standing trees were removed on top (to form a fireguard) and logging truck after logging truck is now in the process of removing them.

When I think of a National Park, I think of someplace pristine where no roads exist, no cattle graze and no hunting allowed; a place like the Cathedrals. Mount Kobau is not my idea of a great candidate for any National Park.
rustled
Admiral HMS Castanet
Posts: 25209
Joined: Dec 26th, 2010, 12:47 pm

Re: Province downplays public support for National Park

Post by rustled »

pentona wrote:...When I think of a National Park, I think of someplace pristine where no roads exist, no cattle graze and no hunting allowed; a place like the Cathedrals. Mount Kobau is not my idea of a great candidate for any National Park.

Yes, but even designating the Cathedrals may be a bad idea, given the intention to draw more tourists.

Over the decades we've visited national parks, we've realized those that are best served by the NP designation are the ones farthest from large population centres, or with the least "hype" around them. It seems to me that here, where we already have big draws for tourists, in order for a NP to draw even more tourists the way the park proponents are suggesting it will, we'd have to do the worst possible thing: make better access to the areas we really don't want to see more people in.

It's such an odd thing to me that any of our local conservationists would push for a park here. There's already a great deal of good work being done to promote protection and respect and conservation, and it seems to me that making these areas accessible to tourists is the absolute antithesis of protecting them. If they'd seen what we've seen over the past few decades, I doubt they'd push for it at all.
There is nothing more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity. - Martin Luther King Jr.
User avatar
JLives
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 23007
Joined: Nov 27th, 2004, 10:53 am

Re: Province downplays public support for National Park

Post by JLives »

pentona wrote:When I think of a National Park, I think of someplace pristine where no roads exist, no cattle graze and no hunting allowed; a place like the Cathedrals. Mount Kobau is not my idea of a great candidate for any National Park.


You can hunt in Cathedral and many other parks at certain times of the year.
"Every dollar you spend is a vote for what you believe in."
"My country is the world, and my religion is to do good."
Tony
Übergod
Posts: 1296
Joined: Aug 11th, 2005, 6:43 am

Re: Province downplays public support for National Park

Post by Tony »

You can hunt in Cathedral and many other parks at certain times of the year.


The Cathedrals aren't NP designate, it's a Provincial Park.

One of the downsides of creating the park in Osoyoos is it would put about 3 cattle ranchers out of business, as they have grazing rights in the area. Talk about endangered species. If you shut down 3 of them, you've pretty much annihilated cattle ranching in the South Okanagan, and that's not good.
rustled
Admiral HMS Castanet
Posts: 25209
Joined: Dec 26th, 2010, 12:47 pm

Re: Province downplays public support for National Park

Post by rustled »

A lot of the area under consideration was and is under some form of provincial or local protection, which IMO makes a lot more sense than making it the tourist attraction it would become as a national park.

Good news here: http://www.castanet.net/news/Penticton/175700/Not-up-for-reconsideration
There is nothing more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity. - Martin Luther King Jr.
Atomoa
Guru
Posts: 5704
Joined: Sep 4th, 2012, 12:21 pm

Re: Province downplays public support for National Park

Post by Atomoa »

http://www.castanet.net/news/Kelowna/17 ... ge-be-gone

Obviously the locals around here know better than environmentalists and are more concerned with conservation.

Lots of "little Iraq's" up Fairview Mountain.
The true business of people should be to go back to
school and think about whatever it was they were
thinking about before somebody came along and told
them they had to earn a living.

- Buckminster Fuller
rustled
Admiral HMS Castanet
Posts: 25209
Joined: Dec 26th, 2010, 12:47 pm

Re: Province downplays public support for National Park

Post by rustled »

I'll bet that brings out some pretty strong emotions in people.

If that's what's happening in any of the areas being considered for a national park, surely there are better ways to solve the problem than by creating an even bigger one.
There is nothing more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity. - Martin Luther King Jr.
Post Reply

Return to “South Okanagan”