Parks Canada explored adopting B.C. provincial grazing regulations in a South Okanagan-Lower Similkameen national park reserve in a move to reassure ranchers, according to a document obtained by the Osoyoos Times.
“The regulations are familiar to ranchers, they provide certainty and they are effective tools for Parks Canada Agency to administer the tenures and manage grazing,” says the document released under federal access to information legislation.
The process of incorporating provincial laws and regulations into federal regulations is known as “incorporation by reference.” The document says this would be “a practical solution to manage grazing in the proposed national park reserve.”
“I think this is hugely significant,” said Chloe O’Loughlin, former director of terrestrial conservation with the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society (CPAWS), who separately obtained the same document also through the access to information process.
“I think it’s the last missing piece of the puzzle,” she said. “It shows that there should be absolutely no negative impact on the ranchers. The ranchers will get to continue to ranch under the provincial legislation, which they like.”
Opposition of some ranchers to the national park has been one of the biggest stumbling blocks. Boundary-Similkameen MLA Linda Larson, a staunch opponent of the national park reserve, has said the park would negatively affect people’s livelihoods and that she would rather have one rancher than four tourists.
The document makes clear that Parks Canada “explored” the idea of incorporation by reference of provincial regulations, but as the document was written after the province abruptly pulled out of talks at the end of 2011, no concrete proposal was put forward to ranchers.
“The proposal would require an amendment to the Canada National Parks Act (CNPA) to incorporate by reference the B.C. Range Act and the Forest and Range Practices Act and associated regulations,” the report said. “Incorporation by reference allows Parliament to make all or part of the provincial regime for grazing management part of the CNPA, so that it becomes federal law applying to a national park.”
The document was drafted by Per Nilsen, manager, national park proposals (south), at Parks Canada. It is undated, but references in the document make it clear that it was written sometime between 2012 and 2015 – after talks between the province and Parks Canada were broken off. The context of the document is unclear.
The Osoyoos Times requested an interview with Nilsen or his supervisor Kevin McNamee, director, parks establishment, but Parks Canada said it would not comment.
O’Loughlin, the former CPAWS terrestrial conservation director, said she understands that Parks Canada prepared a draft plan for resolving ranchers’ concerns that they wanted to take to the ranchers.
“Until the province approved the feasibility study, Parks Canada was not allowed to talk to individual people,” she said. “So understandably the ranchers are concerned because they don’t have security. Their issues are not resolved because Parks Canada could not take this kind of good information out to the ranchers and work with them to deliver a plan that would meet their needs.”
Although the feasibility study was completed in January 2011 and recommended to provincial cabinet by Cairine MacDonald, then deputy environment minister, cabinet balked at accepting it.
The feasibility study was kept under wraps by the province until they were forced to release it in May 2012 in response to a freedom of information request.
Until the province returns to discussions with Parks Canada, none of the proposals for addressing rancher concerns can be put forward, O’Loughlin said.
“They just need to get back to the table,” she said. “They don’t need to say ‘yes’ to a national park until those issues are resolved.”
The feasibility study, jointly prepared by the provincial and federal governments, says there are only five grazing leases, 11 licenses and 12 tenure holders in the proposed national park area. Of these, only five are likely to experience an adverse impact, the study said.
The largest rancher in the proposed park is Ace Elkink, who has already sold substantial portions of this land to the Nature Conservancy of Canada. Elkink has previously said he is willing to negotiate a deal with Parks Canada for additional land.
The Osoyoos Times was unable to reach Elkink for comment before press time.
The second largest rancher is Mark Quaedvlieg of the Southern Interior Stockmen’s Association, who is an opponent of the proposed national park reserve.
Quaedvlieg said he’s never heard anything about the proposal to incorporate provincial grazing regulations into the national park and he wants to see it in writing.
“We’ve had no contact with Parks Canada since (former B.C. Environment Minister) Terry Lake pulled the plug on it,” said Quaedvlieg. “Before that, we had nothing in writing that was meaningful to us as far as being able to continue to ranch in the park.”
Quaedvlieg said he had verbal assurances from Bruno Delesalle, a B.C.-based consultant to Parks Canada, but Quaedvlieg didn’t put any stock in verbal commitments.
“In my last conversation with Bruno Delesalle, I told him it was just a waste of time,” said Quaedvlieg. “He was a nice fellow and everything, but it was just verbal and it didn’t mean anything. We needed an amendment to the Canada National Parks Act. Other than that, the only way we could graze it was that the superintendent could allow grazing for management purposes on a year-to-year basis, which a banker would laugh at.”
Quaedvlieg said ranchers would be more receptive if there was a legal written agreement.
“It has to be written down and it has to have some legal backing,” he said.
Even if ranching were permitted, Quaedvlieg also worries that there are still a number of environmentalists who believe that cattle have no place in a national park. He’s also concerned that some park visitors may object to cattle.
“So that doesn’t give you a lot of comfort and that’s why I’m saying it has to be very firm and legal,” he said.
Currently cattle grazing is permitted as a special case in Grasslands National Park in Saskatchewan, but Quaedvlieg isn’t convinced that’s a permanent arrangement.
“I would suspect at some point it will be buffalo rather than cows,” he said.
The exception for Grasslands National Park is at the discretion of the park superintendent and permits are renewed on an annual basis.
Quaedvlieg also insisted any arrangement can’t harm the economic interests of ranchers.
“The big thing is it’s fine to say you can graze in a national park, but it still has to be affordable,” he said. “There has to be a dollar in doing it. If you have to pay additional fees around permitting and everything else, it just doesn’t work.”
Harry Nielsen, a park supporter and environmentalist, agrees that money is at the heart of the ranchers’ concerns, but he thinks that ranchers have been getting a sweet deal from the province when it comes to grazing fees on provincial Crown land.
Nielsen grew up on a ranch and he has closely followed ranching issues throughout his life, including a period from 1995 to 2001 when he served as an environmental member of the Okanagan Shuswap Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP) process.
Fees are charged by animal unit month (AUM), which includes a cow with calf as a single unit and is levied for the months the animals are grazing on Crown land.
The B.C. Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations (FLNRO), which administers grazing, currently lists the total grazing fees at $3.20 per AUM.
Nielsen believes that the free market value for grazing is closer to $17 per AUM.
“Ranchers stand to lose approximately $90,000 per year if they’ve got to pay market price,” said Nielsen. “If I stood to lose this much money, I think I’d have a ‘No National Park’ sign too.”
There is no indication in the document obtained from Parks Canada whether grazing fees would remain at provincial levels.
The feasibility study proposed that Parks Canada could purchase one or more large ranches on a willing buyer, willing seller basis. The land could then be used by the remaining ranchers, whose grazing areas would be reconfigured to reduce the ecological impact.
O’Loughlin, the former CPAWS staffer, believes that the concerns of ranchers can be solved.
“It’s clearly resolvable,” she said. “As you know, there is just massive support (for a park) from individuals, businesses, tourism operators and First Nations. If that one last issue too could be resolved, it would be good news for everybody.”
RICHARD McGUIRE
Osoyoos Times
