[Previous] [Contents] [Next]

Conclusion

The combination of scientific discourse and highly motivated political activism has proved an effective means of translating ideological environmentalism into public policy. In the US, activism rather than genuine science turned the spotted owl into a rallying symbol during the fight to save the "old growth" forests of the American Northwest. A similar process has made the grizzly bear, now dubbed a "charismatic megavertabrate," into the symbol for environmental activists seeking to push development out of Banff National Park.

The mounting restrictions on access to, and activities within, Banff National Park, are testament to the growing influence that special interest groups have had on Parks Canada policy. As the focus in environmentalist circles has moved away from saving species to saving spaces, the scientific discourse and (sometimes discrete) moralizing that is invoked in support of radical "rewilding" schemes forms the basis of a new environmental orthodoxy. The Banff-Bow Valley Study, the OCA Panel review, and the Ecological Integrity Panel report included the following tenets of this new orthodoxy:

• restricting human access to wilderness
• redefining "appropriate activities" according to an increasingly narrow moral vision
• eliminating "alien" species and progressively enlarging the connected areas deemed necessary for species protection
• legislating regulatory regimes based upon expansive but vague ecological areas, rather than politically-defined boundaries

The policy review process itself reflected the "biases" of its participants, and the assumptions of its science. This orthodoxy does not reflect the genuine policy preferences of ordinary Canadians towards their national parks. Despite the extreme nature of this new orthodoxy, it is being entrenched by government-sponsored research programs and the sustained lobbying efforts of well-funded and well-connected environmental coalitions. By distorting common sense understandings of environmental protection and "ecological integrity," the original dual mandate of Canada's parks that they be both enjoyed by Canadians today and preserved for future generations is gradually being repealed in favour of a narrow, preservationist agenda. By expanding the jurisdiction and restorative mandate of park officials, the new National Parks Act reflects the assumptions and interests that underwrote the EI Panel recommendations, which aspire to complete the organizational redesign of the Parks Canada Agency. Parks policy reviews over the past decade have repeated the dire warnings of environmentalists.

The fact remains that neither the provision of a wide variety of visitor activities nor commercial activity threaten the integrity of the park. On the contrary, visitors and commercial activity provide the opportunity to balance human needs with environmental protection in a single park management strategy. This can only be done by local decision-making, positive incentives, and the responsible stewardship associated with secure, enforceable, transferable property rights.

[Previous] [Contents] [Next]

info@fraserinstitute.ca You can contact us at the above email address for any comments or information requests. Please report any dead links or technical problems.

If you know someone who would be interested in this web page, please enter their email address below, and we will forward this URL to them: Email Address:

Last Modified: August 23, 2000.