Town council.
Lyonel Doherty photo
A municipal councillor in Oliver says it’s imperative that the Town support MLA Linda Larson’s stance on the national park issue.
Last week Jack Bennest submitted a motion to council that will be debated at the next public meeting on April 27.
The motion promotes “living together with respect” by having the Town of Oliver support the province in its endeavours to acquire land to protect the area’s grasslands and to preserve endangered species, while enhancing off-season tourism opportunities.
It goes on to encourage dialogue with First Nations people and local stakeholders towards the goal of better managed wilderness areas.
The motion also encourages the use of the “great outdoors” for continued mining, ranching, hunting, business, forestry and recreation.
Oliver council has taken no official position in the national park debate, other than encourage all sides to remain in discussions.
Bennest said the provincial government has said “no” in a way that is very understandable.
“It is imperative that the Town of Oliver support our local MLA and the provincial government.”
Larson has clearly expressed her opposition to establishing a national park, saying that ranching interests trump tourism interests.
She also downplayed a recent opinion poll that suggested that support for the park is growing.
Bennest said the wording in his motion reflects all of the common ground that has been agreed to by both sides of the issue.
“I believe council will see the wisdom of not taking a position, other than one that protects endangered species, fosters more consolidation of land in reserves, better land management, and a strategy to bring tourists to world class facilities in the South Okanagan Similkameen.”
At the same time, it keeps control as local as possible, respecting the wishes and feelings of native people and all who live here and enjoy the outdoors, Bennest said.
Environment Minister Mary Polak previously stated they do not support a national park reserve in the South Okanagan.
“Instead, we have started a process to explore a provincial approach to meet the varying interests in this diverse region.”
Polak said they are engaging with First Nations and various groups to understand their vision for the area.
She noted these discussions will help identify flexible tools to ensure the protection of geographic and cultural values, while also providing recreation and tourism opportunities.
“I understand the importance of protecting these values, while also preserving long standing economic and culturally significant activities such as hunting and fishing,” Polak said.
Oliver municipal councillor Larry Schwartzenberger said Bennest’s motion should prompt some lively debate.
“Each councillor comes to this discussion with their own background and ideas for protecting species and grassland vegetation while maintaining some level of access for the public.”
During her election campaign, Councillor Petra Veintimilla said Oliver should be leading the charge in asking the provincial and federal governments to re-enter talks.
She noted that a park reserve would bring jobs, people and money to the area.
Commenting on the motion, park supporter Jim Wyse said there is no provincial equivalent to a national park.
“Not only does it provide the protection of the lands and its creatures in perpetuity, but it brings guaranteed funding to ensure the process is perpetuated. It’s because of this guarantee that national parks attract tourists in droves, and that would be good for Oliver.”
Wyse said the province cannot compete at that level, nor should it try.
According to Wyse, the province has not said “no” to the park.
“Our MLA Linda Larson has said ‘no’ to the park, and the party being gracious for the time being at least, appears to be showing a level party solidarity.”
Wyse said he doesn’t see any benefit in passing Bennest’s motion, and he hopes council rejects it.
Lyonel Doherty
Oliver Chronicle
