Proponents of a national park for the South Okanagan are devastated but promise the issue is far from over, while opponents are thrilled with the provincial government’s announcement last week to withdraw its support.
“We’re thrilled,” said Greg Norton, spokesman for the Grassland Park Review Coalition, which has opposed the proposed national park since discussions of a feasibility study were first introduced by Parks Canada more than eight years ago. “Our issues have been blatantly ignored and rejected by Parks Canada since the beginning of this process, yet the provincial government has finally seen the light and made the correct decision to withdraw its support for the park.
“The fact Parks Canada has steadfastly refused to listen to the legitimate concerns of the people who live here and wanted their concerns addressed has, in my opinion, swayed a great many people.”
Doug Brown, president of the Oliver/Osoyoos Naturalist Club, and Dick Cannings, an outspoken and well-respected environmentalist from Penticton, said they remain in shock the province has, without notice, announced its decision to withdraw support for the park, which would run from the American border West of Osoyoos and wind throughout large tracts of the south Okanagan heading towards Mount Kobau.
Brown said no reason has been given by the province for withdrawing its support, which is “deeply frustrating” after eight years of negotiations by stakeholders.
“I’m not sure why they did it and there has been no reason why they have come to their decision,” he said. “They just said they are withdrawing their support at this time.”
Those is favour of the park “far outweigh” those opposed as a recent public opinion poll and numerous surveys conclude more than 60 per cent of residents in the affected area are favour building a national park, which makes the government’s decision hard to digest, said Brown.
Norton disagrees saying all public opinion polls and surveys have been heavily swayed by “people who aren’t truly affected” from cities like Penticton and Kelowna and largely ignored the majority of residents who live and work in or near the park’s proposed boundaries – the majority who remain opposed.
Brown insists the government and public at large “has been lied to by the no people … lied to about the threat of expropriation of land, which has never been discussed, and greatly influenced by people unwilling to acknowledge the vast majority of people are in favour of this park.”
Brown insists a powerful lobby by hunters and ATV operators has influenced the government to withdraw its support.
Norton said any suggestions make him extremely upset.
“You know that really bothers me,” he said. “One must never forget the people leading the way for this park are corporate environmentalists from Vancouver and they have their locals here willing to spread their message. Blaming it all on the hunters and ATVers is all part of their convenient strategy.
“Go into any fire hall in B.C. or any search and rescue organization and you will find most people there hunt and enjoy the outdoors. The reality is in rural B.C., business owners and doctors and lawyers and orchardists love to hunt. This campaign to smear these people is attacking the very fibre of our communities. They’re trying to vilify an entire group of people for no good reason and it has backfired.”
Brown said it’s now up to people who support the national park to write their local MLA and premier Christy Clark to voice their disappointment and make it clear this fight is far from over.
The south Okanagan “is home to more endangered species than anywhere else in Canada” and building a national park would ensure dozens of species would be protected, said Brown.
There’s no protection in place through legislation for these species and so few staff to manage environmental resources the problem is only going to get worse unless a park is built, he said.
Cannings, who has been a vocal environmentalist for more than three decades, agreed saying he’s flabbergasted the province would withdraw its support without giving any reasons after eight years of negotiations.
“No one seems to know why they made this decision, which is very frustrating,” he said. “Considering the majority of people are in favour of the park, this decision came out of the blue and on the face of it, really doesn’t seem to make any sense.”
The government’s withdrawal of its support “clearly comes down to politics” as nothing else makes sense considering local MLA and former Osoyoos mayor John Slater has long supported building the park, but has suddenly had a change of heart, he said.
“He’s obviously been told to tow the party line,” he said.
Slater could not be reached for comment as of Tuesday’s press deadline.
There are numerous reasons he supports a national park, but at the top of his list is the fact several hundred badly-needed jobs would be created, said Cannings.
“Jobs are scarce and these would be good, clean, long-term jobs,” he said.
Cannings believes most of those opposed to the park “have been fed false information” by a small, but vocal and influential group leading the opposition.
The province’s withdrawal of support comes at a curious time, said Cannings, considering tentative agreements have been reached to appease the many concerns of local native bands and majority of ranchers in the affected boundaries of the park, said Cannings.
“Just when several outstanding issues were finally getting resolved, the province pulls the plug, which baffles me after eight years of hard slogging,” he said. “If it wasn’t so serious, it would truly be funny.”
Cannings said the province’s withdrawal of support doesn’t mean this issue is dead and finished.
“The reality is there is a huge amount of support out there for this park,” he said. “This is far from over and all of us who realize the benefits are going to have to work very hard to have this decision overturned.
“I really thought facts and logic would carry the day, but obviously politics got in the way. Businesses in general … hotel owners, restaurants, wineries, are all in favour realizing the economic impact will be significant. But these people have been essentially afraid to speak out and have been muzzled by opponents who continue to spread the message most people in this area are against the park, which is blatantly false.”
Norton, who said he has great respect for Brown and Cannings and their passion for the environment, disagrees with pretty much all of the arguments they presented in favour of the national park.
Norton said he became involved because his orchard, home and private property are located very close to park boundaries and he’s concerned about the potential of forest fires threatening his land and safety if a national park were opened.
For the yes side to suggest the majority of ranchers in the area have been appeased and are now in favour of the park “is simply untrue” as he speaks to these people every day and the vast majority want nothing to do with the park, he said.
“Anyone I know with tenure has only fear and uncertainty,” he said. “To suggest these ranchers are in favour, is not true. They have deep concerns. Tenure holders are not comfortable at all with Parks Canada as they have been ignored throughout this process from day one.”
Opening a national park would increase bear populations and threaten numerous fruit growers in the area, the forestry sector, while not large, would be adversely affected and numerous mining claims that have been filed in the affected boundaries would have to be settled at the cost of tens of millions of dollars, said Norton.
“These are all legitimate concerns that have been basically ignored,” he said.
The fact thousands of acres of land would no longer be available for hunting and motorized recreation activity is also a concern, but nowhere near as important as park proponents lead the public to believe, he said.
After more than 40 years serving his community as a conservationist, member of the Regional District of Okanagan Similkameen and a businessman, Norton said he’s never seen such a concerted effort by interest groups in favour of this park to mislead the public.
“Most of what they’re telling people is just not true and that’s the problem,” he said. “The province’s land management plans in the south Okanagan have basically been put on hold for nine years and that’s a crying shame because we could have been working together to improve the quality of life for everyone here.”
Another key element those in favour have failed to divulge is Parks Canada doesn’t have ” a red penny” to spend on land acquisition to purchase land from ranchers or property owners.
“Where is the money,?” he asked. “They don’t have any money. Why spend millions and millions of dollars to open a park with very little economic benefit. I’ve talked to friends working in Jasper and they’re working with a fleet of vehicles 12 years old because the cupboard is dry. The reality is national parks don’t make any money and provide very little economic benefit.”
Many opposed to the park are staunch environmentalists as well and would be open to meeting in the future with all stakeholders to work out a detailed long-term plan to protect wildlife habitat, while allowing outdoor enthusiasts and ranchers to maintain their property rights, said Norton.
He doesn’t believe the province is going to change its mind on this issue as it’s clear they have listened to all stakeholders before making the decision to withdraw support, said Norton.
