Question:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – As you may be aware, Canadian Heritage has recently taken the decision to privatize the bulk of Parks Canada services. This decision comes on the heels of years of cost-recovery measures by Parks Canada The Parks system is truly a part of our national heritage, if not actually of our national identity. To see our the accessibility and, with privatization, the standards of Parks Canada eroded fills me with anger and sadness. Many of your American friends share your feelings. We have seen some of the dimbulbs in our Congress suggest privatizing our heritage for a few gold coins. It is truly sad to see that short-sighted policies enacted in the guise of fiscal responsibility can have far reaching AND permanent damage on our environment. What happens to the land once it has been fully exploited by the mining and resource extraction crowd?
Does not compute – Non Sequitur – Aaron Bradley posted concerning Parks Canada’s proposal to privatize *services*. Americans can attest that Harvey at Grand Canyon, Curry at Yosemite and many others have *not* eroded accessibility or Nat. Park standards over the decades. For some reason Robert Armstrong thinks that Park Canada’s proposal is of the same type as Sen. Hank Brown’s proposal in the US Congress. So far as I can see (3-22-96), it is not. Furthermore, I can see some merit in divesting such US units as Steam- town USA in Pennsylvania, which can be best described as "National Historic Porks", established to fulfil the desire of a Congressman rather than to protect a worthwhile piece of our heritage. Do we really need to protect in the NPS Richard Nixon’s boyhood home? These "Porks" take money away from the Parks that really need protect- ing. I have posted a separate response to Aaron Bradley’s original post. else we may face the same problem here in the U.S.
My best take on Canada’s problem is that they got into it through poor fiscal and economic management of the whole Canadian economy and the Canadian Govt. budget. Robt. Armstrong urges the readers to keep an eagle eye on how the politicians are managing the parks. I suggest that the readers need to keep one eye on how the politicians manage the US economy and the US Govt. budget. We already see that a tight US Budget has degraded infrastructure maintenance in the US National Parks and reduced the number of rangers. David Olson, my posting, my response
Response:
Brett, Several areas to go along the mountains. As far as pimative goes, just get off the road and drive (preferably w/ 4×4 or pickup truck). And I have the product. I apologize upfront for taking this opportunity to show you my new "Covered Wagon" tent but I thought it may fit your need, or at least make it easier for you to camp in private w/o hassels. Visit www.iminet.com/canyongear Also, see National Parks link. Tons of great camping info and maps to make your own trails. Ken
Response:
I had heard that Canada’s budget and taxation had reached their limits and that the Canadian Govt. and Canadians were unnervingly close to the brink, able to peer over the edge at national bankruptcy.
Some of us, unfortunately, refuse to look down and are thus not yet afraid of further debt. Even more unfortunately, that number includes many in the federal government. In the meantime, be grateful that you are not Mexico, and don’t have their economic problems, or the challenges facing their parks.
Very true; our society has never highly valued civil corruption, and we can still manage to keep the country running as it should as long as there are enough honest souls doing the work. Glenn Mor
Response:
This is a more effective approach in US politics than in Canadian. We have political parties that have *much* stronger control over individual electors. This makes the entry fee to the political influence game a lot higher up here: you have to buy the attentions of a lot more than one elector. Generally, only corporate/collective entities have this kind of cash. Dhu
: I hope that all our Canadian friends can stop the rape of their land. : Let this be a warning to those of you who think government has no place : in a modern capitalist society. Who profits from protecting our natural : resources? The people, that’s who. Who spends billion$ of dollar$ : lobbying our Congress for "relief" from environmental regulation? : Businesses who are only concerned about next quarters profits and : bonuses. : Yes, we have the best Congress that money can buy!! The only way now : to fight back is with $$$$. I’ve decided to send my own money to the : conservation organizations of my choice. Yes, its a couple of hundred : dollars out of my pocket this year, and probably next, but its pretty : cheap for what I get. : And YES, I know this is not the way the system is supposed to work. : But if we just sit back and wait for government to clean up, all our : wilderness will dissappear. I urge everyone I know to send in even a : few extra bucks this year. In the US it can really make a difference : in an election, and its a proven formula to let the Candidates know : that there is more than luke-warm support for active environmentalism.
Response:
I am in need of some assistance. I am looking for information on camping in the IL,IN,WI,MO,TN,KY areas whether it be campgrounds or state/national parks. I would prefer some place where you could pick your own site, have privacy, fishing, hiking, swimming, maybe horseback riding, beautiful scenery and wildlife. I am more concerned about the area being wide open and private, where no one is right on top of you and I would like it if it was a woods or forest.
Response:
Aaron Bradley posted concerning Parks Canada’s proposal to privatize *services*. Americans can attest that Harvey at Grand Canyon, Curry at Yosemite and many others have *not* eroded accessibility or Nat. Park standards over the decades.
Speak for yourself, not for Americans. Concessionaires like the Curry Company would do anything to make a buck. The Yosemite Camp & Curry Company got away with installing series of liquor stores, bars, delis, restaurants, volleyball courts and golf courses, tee-shirt shops, lodgings ranging from cruddy tent-cabins to the opulent Ahwahnee, they fed bears to entertain their customers, and pressed for a big cable car system to Glacier Point (from which they used to push big bonfires over the rim for "entertainment". Emphasizing commercialism over wilderness protection and interpretation was the major factor in creating the present congested conditions in Yosemite Valley. The citizens finally got fed up with the Japanese-owned company, and now there is a new concessionaire. Such crap has definitely compromised NPS standards. Anyone interested in diabotical concessionaire policies should read Michael Frome’s _Regreening the National Parks_. It’s an eye-opener. Furthermore, I can see some merit in divesting such US units as Steam- town USA in Pennsylvania, which can be best described as "National Historic Porks", established to fulfil the desire of a Congressman rather than to protect a worthwhile piece of our heritage. Do we really need to protect in the NPS Richard Nixon’s boyhood home? These "Porks" take money away from the Parks that really need protect- ing.
Contrary to earlier claims and expectations, Steamtown NHS has proved to be a good investment. Visitation in the first six months numbered in the hundreds of thousands as many Americans and foreign visitors took advantage of a chance to learn more about the nation’s engineering heritage. As for Richard Nixon’s boyhood home, it is not a NPS unit. It may be a California or private site, but it is not a federal boondoggle. NPS over the years has convinced Congress to ditch a few park units. Mackinac Island, Sullys Hill NM in North Dakota, Mar-a-Lago in Florida and others have been purged from the system. But almost all of the present units would, I believe, merit protection. And in almost all cases, they have a positive effect on the economy through tourist spending. They are one of our best investments.
Response:
I hope that all our Canadian friends can stop the rape of their land. Let this be a warning to those of you who think government has no place in a modern capitalist society. Who profits from protecting our natural resources? The people, that’s who. Who spends billion$ of dollar$ lobbying our Congress for "relief" from environmental regulation? Businesses who are only concerned about next quarters profits and bonuses.
Yes, we have the best Congress that money can buy!! The only way now to fight back is with $$$$. I’ve decided to send my own money to the conservation organizations of my choice. Yes, its a couple of hundred dollars out of my pocket this year, and probably next, but its pretty cheap for what I get. And YES, I know this is not the way the system is supposed to work. But if we just sit back and wait for government to clean up, all our wilderness will dissappear. I urge everyone I know to send in even a few extra bucks this year. In the US it can really make a difference in an election, and its a proven formula to let the Candidates know that there is more than luke-warm support for active environmentalism.
Response:
As you may be aware, Canadian Heritage has recently taken the decision to privatize the bulk of Parks Canada services. What services: Concessions? The Backcountry office? What else? Privatizing concessions could be an improvement – particularly if you avoid granting an exclusive franchise to any one corporation. (The only example I can think of *right* now:) The City of Denver tried to establish a city-owned ski area in Winter Park twice several decades ago, and failed. Then they granted a concession to a private company. It succeeded and is still going strong. (Forget *ski* area, private companies can probably run the lodges, teahouses, grocery stores, thermal bathes, etc., better than state-employees can)
[sinp] Privatization is not necessarily the best alternative for every single organization. A private company’s goal is to make as much money as possible. Canada’s parks, I believe, should be protected from the commercialism that has ruined many parks I’ve seen here in the U.S., including the Grand Canyon (despite the fact that it’s run by the federal government). This is not possible if Canada’s parks are being run by people who’s #1 aim is to profit, rather than preserve. | Neil | | University of Arizona | | http://u.arizona.edu/~neilends | | Citizen of the Hyphenated Republic of | | Canada |
Response:
Fellow Parks Canada users: [my apologies to others on this group] As you may be aware, Canadian Heritage has recently taken the decision to privatize the bulk of Parks Canada services.
What services: Concessions? The Backcountry office? What else? Privatizing concessions could be an improvement – particularly if you avoid granting an exclusive franchise to any one corporation. (The only example I can think of *right* now:) The City of Denver tried to establish a city-owned ski area in Winter Park twice several decades ago, and failed. Then they granted a concession to a private company. It succeeded and is still going strong. (Forget *ski* area, private companies can probably run the lodges, teahouses, grocery stores, thermal bathes, etc., better than state-employees can) The Backcountry Office? Americans should pause before adding their voice to yours. Wilderness Permits in Inyo National Forest, at least, are handled by a private service. I haven’t heard any complaints against them. What else? This decision comes on the heels of years of cost-recovery measures by Parks Canada, resulting in an erosion of Parks Canada services and a user-fee structure which has now put the enjoyment of Canada’s National Parks outside of the means of many ordinary Canadians. The Parks system is truly a part of our national heritage, if not actually of our national identity. To see our accessibility and the standards of Parks Canada eroded fills me with anger and sadness.
I had heard that Canada’s budget and taxation had reached their limits and that the Canadian Govt. and Canadians were unnervingly close to the brink, able to peer over the edge at national bankruptcy. Now that you mention it I am not suprised at the erosion of services or the imposition of a user-fee structure. If you want to save the parks you will have to get the rest of your national life into order. BTW, what part of Canada are you from? Reform country? Quebec? Ontario? In the meantime, be grateful that you are not Mexico, and don’t have their economic problems, or the challenges facing their parks. I feel for those who will lose their jobs as a result of this latest "cost-saving" measure.
Most of them will be hired by the private concessionaires, and will probably find their jobs more enjoyable – more to the point, less subject to the national budget_and_political trauma. The best for the future … David Olson, my posting, my response.
Response:
As you may be aware, Canadian Heritage has recently taken the decision to privatize the bulk of Parks Canada services. This decision comes on the heels of years of cost-recovery measures by Parks Canada, resulting in an erosion of Parks Canada services and a user-fee structure which has now put the enjoyment of Canada’s National Parks outside of the means of many ordinary Canadians. The Parks system is truly a part of our national heritage, if not actually of our national identity. To see our the accessibility and, with privatization, the standards of Parks Canada eroded fills me with anger and sadness.
Many of your American friends share your feelings. We have seen some of the dimbulbs in our Congress suggest privatizing our heritage for a few gold coins. It is truly sad to see that short-sighted policies enacted in the guise of fiscal responsibility can have far reaching AND permanent damage on our environment. What happens to the land once it has been fully exploited by the mining and resource extraction crowd? "They paved paradise and put a parking lot." Joni Mitchell got it right, unfortunately. I hope that all our Canadian friends can stop the rape of their land. Let this be a warning to those of you who think government has no place in a modern capitalist society. Who profits from protecting our natural resources? The people, that’s who. Who spends billion$ of dollar$ lobbying our Congress for "relief" from environmental regulation? Businesses who are only concerned about next quarters profits and bonuses. Vote for people who care about our National Park Lands, don’t be swayed by flashy ads or propaganda. Read newspapers, books and newsgroups to figure out who the real friends of the earth are and then help elect them or else we may face the same problem here in the U.S. O.K., I will come down from the soapbox now. 
Response:
Fellow Parks Canada users: [my apologies to others on this group] As you may be aware, Canadian Heritage has recently taken the decision to privatize the bulk of Parks Canada services. This decision comes on the heels of years of cost-recovery measures by Parks Canada, resulting in an erosion of Parks Canada services and a user-fee structure which has now put the enjoyment of Canada’s National Parks outside of the means of many ordinary Canadians. The Parks system is truly a part of our national heritage, if not actually of our national identity. To see our the accessibility and, with privatization, the standards of Parks Canada eroded fills me with anger and sadness. I urge any Canadian who feels the same as I to protest this latest move by contacting their M.P. and the Minister of Canadian Heritage, Sheila Copps. Either may be written to free of charge (i.e. without a stamp) by addressing your letter to the M.P. at the Canadian House of Commons. Web users may also fax M.P.s for free by using the excellent NetEffects Communications "Fax the Feds" service at http://www.net-efx.com/cgi-bin/neteffect/faxfeds. By the way I am neither an employee of, nor affiliated with, Parks Canada, though I certainly feel for those who will lose their jobs as a result of this latest "cost-saving" measure. Aaron Bradley