Round table decision making

Tourism stakeholders often have a hard time being heard above the overpowering influence of big industry.  Logging companies who sponsor political parties are listened to much more frequently then adventure tour operators looking to open a new trail.  One of the solutions to this issue is round table decision making as outlined in the article "Conflict in Natural Area Destinations: A Critique of Representation and Interest in Participatory Process".  

Although there have been and will continue to be growing pains with this process, I think that it is a step in the right direction.  Round table decision making essentially takes representatives from all influenced parties and gives them equal representation and decision making power.  This process allows each voice to be heard and eliminates monocratic decisions.  Because our government is so heavily influenced by lobby groups and industry leaders, this is a way for the smaller interests to be heard.

This style of decision making is fairly new to the park system but will be a great forum for the tourism industry to speak up.  I think that tourism is a great alternative to many other industries and can set a benchmark for ethical use of land.  If all industries come to the same table they will be able to openly share ideas and criticisms.  This will allow the region to see the true economic value and ecological impact of proposed development and make much more educated and rounded decisions. 

Conservation through Recreation

Many of the articles that I have read in the last few weeks about conservation have been based on the opinions and efforts by recreationalists.   Conserving the natural environment, whether it be beach, forest, mountain or river is a top priority for most recreational groups.  Without the natural environment partaking in these activities would be impossible.  Surfers would be limited to crowded tourist beaches, climbers stuck in the gym and kayakers sitting on conveyor belts between surf sessions.

Because recreational groups form a bond and feeling of ownership of their playgrounds they are the perfect stewards to represent and protect the wilderness.  By spending so much time embedded in the wild, recreationalists are able to understand the true value of the wilderness.  Historically some of the biggest players in the battle for national parks have had strong ties to the wild through there own recreation.

I think that if these groups can show the economic value of the wilderness that they know so well, they will be able to save it from development.  If sport tourism can be used as an alternative to logging or mining then these places can remain wild.

Paddling down one of BC's 455 Endangered Creeks

Surfers fight to keep access

Access to wilderness areas is at risk all across BC.  Creeks and rivers are being dammed, forests being harvested and mountain tops being removed for mining.  The current BC government's mandate seems to be to sell of as much resources as possible and deal with the consequences later.  But the coastline?  Is it possible for the government to restrict access to surf and beaches?

In Jordan River, this is now an ongoing battle.  The BC Liberals have allowed one of their largest donors and owners of much of the land surrounding Jordan River to subdivide and develop the coastline.  Because logging can only last for so long Western Forest Projects plans to add residential development to the lands which they currently manage and harvest.  If these projects were to go through, access to the beaches and coastline would be restricted, rivers would be polluted, and sustainable forestry would come to an abrupt halt to make way for clear cutting and condos.

One solution being offered by locals is to protect the area as a park.  With park status the wilderness and coastline would be protected from development and excessive forestry.  Because this land was traditionally owned by a number of First Nations, there is also a huge push by them to keep development out.  This gives the opportunity for recreationalists and First Nations to work together on providing a solution.

Because recreational groups and conservationists are often over looked, working with First Nations may be one of the best possible solutions.  Often our goals are the same.  First Nations want to keep the land in its traditional form.  Recreation groups want to enjoy the wilderness in its natural state.  This is the perfect partnership to gain a louder voice.  Bringing stakeholders together and finding common goals may be one of the best ways to protect the wilderness areas that our government is pawning off.
article: SBC SURF Spring 2008 ENVIROFILE: Jordan River is mine?
image from: www.bcsurfer.com