Canyon Country Zephyr page 12

<<Prev                                                   Home                        PDF                              Next>>

A Sordid and Destructive Affair:

Mountain Biking in Canada's National Parks

By Dr. Brian L. Horejsi Calgary, Alberta, Canada

as National trails coordinator, who may well have chaired that meeting! Having railroaded the process, it appears Parks Canada willingly subjected itself, the people of Canada, and just as importantly, democracy itself, to a coup d'etat, as the Minister has recently reaffirmed that mountain biking "could soon become part of the menu of activities offered in national Parks"(2). This is a factually dishonest statement, since biking has already invaded parks like Banff and Jasper.

Citizens around the world, particularly in self described progressive nations, have long been suspicious and distrustful of government(s) that exclude the public from decision making. While they have rarely done anything about transgressions of their democratic rights, the public remains, collectively, a powerful force that routinely diverges in its opinions, desires and vision from that of the special interests that lobby government or are welcomed in the government fold because they endorse a given government agenda.

In an effort to neutralize, that is "control", this latent public power and still, at least superficially, mollify those members of the public who take their responsibility as a citizen seriously, federal, state and provincial governments have succeeded in forcing and compartmentalizing citizens into the category of a special interest. The public increasingly finds itself relegated to stakeholder status, in

While this represents a grotesque betrayal of democratic process, what is equally as duplicitous is the eagerness with which certain individuals and environmental groups (including prominent ones such as the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society) abandon the public, ecological science, historical precedents, and legal and due process, and embrace and defend their now favored stakeholder sta-

tus, encasing themselves as insiders" in these closed-to-the-public meetings and discussions.

While this divisive process has continued to evolve since the 1970s, stakeholder politics now reign as the most democratically erosive and environmentally destructive schemes conceived of by governments catering to growth and expansion agendas of commercial and corporate interests. Governments, particularly corporate friendly ones, have embraced these deceptive processes as a means of excluding the public from participating in what should be legislated public processes, thus divorcing the people from decisions related to the control and management of exceptionally valuable public resources like National Parks.

most cases more impotent than many commercial and corporate special interests.

This transformation of public rights is nothing short of a brilliant political takeover by special, almost exclusively, commercial interests. As one environmentally perceptive author states, it is easy to "understand the dynamics of power and repression at work" in something like the rise of stakeholder politics. And it is in the area of environmental protection and regulation that this coercive process plays a particularly potent role. A process that reduces the voices of millions down to a dozen or so representatives cannot maintain control unless it picks and chooses who will be allowed to "play the game". And as dishonest as it is evident, governments appear to "find their principles" when picking and funding stakeholder participants, now insisting on "equal representation". As a consequence, 33 million Canadians for example, find themselves "represented", albeit begrudgingly and in limited cases, in Federal

From within this cesspool of corrupted internal machinations, a non-existent public hearing process , and critically flawed and prej -udicial public consultation claims, has oozed the latest in what has become a mountain of threats to Canada's National Parks—mountain biking. True to its secretive

political and management culture, Parks Canada has held no public hearings - let me emphasize this; we are talking about never - and commissioned or internally instigated no social impact or environmental impact assessment of the widely known and well documented damages and conflicts generated by mountain biking. Nowhere in the National Park system is the threat greater than in Banff National Park, the internationally recognized flagship of Canadas Park system, where public policy has been hijacked by private sector Chamber of com-

government decision-making by a handful of spokespersons from environmental groups, while equal or greater numbers of spokespeople for commercial and corporate interests represent the interests of dozens or hundreds of special interest stakeholders.

In the interests of new found "equal representation", democracy is turned upside down in stakeholder roundtables where 3 or 4 Eco reps find themselves facing 8 or 10 commercial / corporate stakeholders and spokespersons from

33 million Canadians for example, find themselves "represented", albeit begrudgingly

and in limited cases, in Federal government decision-making by a handful of spokespersons

from environmental groups, while equal or greater numbers of spokespeople

for commercial and corporate interests represent the interests

of dozens or hundreds of special interest stakeholders.

government running the process. When Parks Canada held its "public meeting" of hand-picked participants to endorse, and at least in their eyes, "legitimize" mountain biking in Canada's National Parks, they invited 3 Eco "delegates", provided they were a "Senior representative of an ENGO whose mandate is in line with that of Parks Canada".(1)

These sorry delegates were to represent the Canadian public at a "table" stacked with 37 other people representing interests such as "partners, mountain biking groups and associations, equipment suppliers, companies who manage the activity." As if this were not a sordid enough affair, Parks Canada hired the former executive director of the Canadian International Mountain Biking Association

merce interests with deceptively folksy names such as the Association of Mountain Parks for Protection & Enjoyment.

The fundamental failure of this close-knit alliance between business interests, public lands agencies and hand picked environmental group "stakeholders" is that they aggressively exclude participation by historical and traditional low-impact public lands users, each of whom has, and should have, a constitutional right to be heard. As a result there is no voice for the large numbers of citizens who support the historical and traditional culture of National Parks and who oppose the expansion of destructive, divisive and conflict laden commercial exploitation of our public lands.

<<Prev                                                   Home                        PDF                              Next>>

	<<Prev Home PDF Next>>

	A Sordid and Destructive Affair: Mountain Biking in Canada's National Parks By Dr. Brian L. Horejsi Calgary, Alberta, Canada as National trails coordinator, who may well have chaired that meeting! Having railroaded the process, it appears Parks Canada willingly subjected itself, the people of Canada, and just as importantly, democracy itself, to a coup d'etat, as the Minister has recently reaffirmed that mountain biking "could soon become part of the menu of activities offered in national Parks"(2). This is a factually dishonest statement, since biking has already invaded parks like Banff and Jasper. Citizens around the world, particularly in self described progressive nations, have long been suspicious and distrustful of government(s) that exclude the public from decision making. While they have rarely done anything about transgressions of their democratic rights, the public remains, collectively, a powerful force that routinely diverges in its opinions, desires and vision from that of the special interests that lobby government or are welcomed in the government fold because they endorse a given government agenda. In an effort to neutralize, that is "control", this latent public power and still, at least superficially, mollify those members of the public who take their responsibility as a citizen seriously, federal, state and provincial governments have succeeded in forcing and compartmentalizing citizens into the category of a special interest. The public increasingly finds itself relegated to stakeholder status, in While this represents a grotesque betrayal of democratic process, what is equally as duplicitous is the eagerness with which certain individuals and environmental groups (including prominent ones such as the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society) abandon the public, ecological science, historical precedents, and legal and due process, and embrace and defend their now favored stakeholder sta- tus, encasing themselves as insiders" in these closed-to-the-public meetings and discussions. While this divisive process has continued to evolve since the 1970s, stakeholder politics now reign as the most democratically erosive and environmentally destructive schemes conceived of by governments catering to growth and expansion agendas of commercial and corporate interests. Governments, particularly corporate friendly ones, have embraced these deceptive processes as a means of excluding the public from participating in what should be legislated public processes, thus divorcing the people from decisions related to the control and management of exceptionally valuable public resources like National Parks. most cases more impotent than many commercial and corporate special interests. This transformation of public rights is nothing short of a brilliant political takeover by special, almost exclusively, commercial interests. As one environmentally perceptive author states, it is easy to "understand the dynamics of power and repression at work" in something like the rise of stakeholder politics. And it is in the area of environmental protection and regulation that this coercive process plays a particularly potent role. A process that reduces the voices of millions down to a dozen or so representatives cannot maintain control unless it picks and chooses who will be allowed to "play the game". And as dishonest as it is evident, governments appear to "find their principles" when picking and funding stakeholder participants, now insisting on "equal representation". As a consequence, 33 million Canadians for example, find themselves "represented", albeit begrudgingly and in limited cases, in Federal From within this cesspool of corrupted internal machinations, a non-existent public hearing process , and critically flawed and prej -udicial public consultation claims, has oozed the latest in what has become a mountain of threats to Canada's National Parks—mountain biking. True to its secretive political and management culture, Parks Canada has held no public hearings - let me emphasize this; we are talking about never - and commissioned or internally instigated no social impact or environmental impact assessment of the widely known and well documented damages and conflicts generated by mountain biking. Nowhere in the National Park system is the threat greater than in Banff National Park, the internationally recognized flagship of Canadas Park system, where public policy has been hijacked by private sector Chamber of com- government decision-making by a handful of spokespersons from environmental groups, while equal or greater numbers of spokespeople for commercial and corporate interests represent the interests of dozens or hundreds of special interest stakeholders. In the interests of new found "equal representation", democracy is turned upside down in stakeholder roundtables where 3 or 4 Eco reps find themselves facing 8 or 10 commercial / corporate stakeholders and spokespersons from 33 million Canadians for example, find themselves "represented", albeit begrudgingly and in limited cases, in Federal government decision-making by a handful of spokespersons from environmental groups, while equal or greater numbers of spokespeople for commercial and corporate interests represent the interests of dozens or hundreds of special interest stakeholders. government running the process. When Parks Canada held its "public meeting" of hand-picked participants to endorse, and at least in their eyes, "legitimize" mountain biking in Canada's National Parks, they invited 3 Eco "delegates", provided they were a "Senior representative of an ENGO whose mandate is in line with that of Parks Canada".(1) These sorry delegates were to represent the Canadian public at a "table" stacked with 37 other people representing interests such as "partners, mountain biking groups and associations, equipment suppliers, companies who manage the activity." As if this were not a sordid enough affair, Parks Canada hired the former executive director of the Canadian International Mountain Biking Association merce interests with deceptively folksy names such as the Association of Mountain Parks for Protection & Enjoyment. The fundamental failure of this close-knit alliance between business interests, public lands agencies and hand picked environmental group "stakeholders" is that they aggressively exclude participation by historical and traditional low-impact public lands users, each of whom has, and should have, a constitutional right to be heard. As a result there is no voice for the large numbers of citizens who support the historical and traditional culture of National Parks and who oppose the expansion of destructive, divisive and conflict laden commercial exploitation of our public lands.

	<<Prev Home PDF Next>>