Parks Policies and Use of Space In Vancouver

Introduction

The City of Vancouver in British Colombia has registered a growing concern over the protection of the environment to facilitate preservation of recreational space. The approach takes shape through enacting policies that ensure the protection of ecologically sensitive areas such as public spaces that host the country’s old natural forests and habitats. It is worth noting that such policies work towards ensuring no construction takes place in the sensitive ecosystems. The advocates of such policies are keen to highlight that continued exposure of the public to these areas will lead to destruction and eventual collapse of the ecologically sensitive areas. In any case, the tourism sector is keen to advance attraction sites in its renewed strategy geared at increasing the number of international visitors.

 Parks policies in Vancouver, British Columbia.

The British Colombia administration understands very well the role parks and open spaces play in serving the public interest and as such, the provincial park’s policies come in handy to manage parks and protected areas. Parks and protected areas are instrumental in building local economies and supporting community recreation activities. Therefore, the Vancouver administration offers a strict and definitive legislative protection. Any changes in the boundaries around the parks and protected areas fall under three categories as defined the existing policies.  The first category under which boundary adjustments can take effect is through the need to carry out “administrative housekeeping”. This is necessary towards the correction of any errors in what is deemed as a legal boundary, that is, an area that was designated as protected by mistake. The second category is any adjustment that may necessitate the need for change to avert human health and safety concerns.  The last but not least category is the adjustment that may either come to play to accommodate private or public developments in an area captured as protected and that needs authorization from the relevant authorities.

The policy that governs the above categories is cabinet-approved and is popularly known as “The Provincial Protected Area Boundary Adjustment Policy, Process, and Guidelines”.   It is imperative to acknowledge the fact category only comes to play when the approval will lead to a cumulative economic, environmental and social benefits that are over and above the importance of preserving existing parks and protected areas. Therefore, any approval would only take place if the stakeholders involved demonstrate that, all alternatives that would have been considered to avoid the protected have been exhaustively put to task. Also, a thorough documentation of necessary economic benefits should be in place and at the same time put in test social and environmental impacts that would come to play due to the said activity. Further, mitigation and restoration aspects should be in place. The above considerations notwithstanding, proponents have to ensure the local communities have been consulted and at the same time consult with provincial and Federal agencies.

Any form of interference in the parks and protected areas take shape through two stages. The first stage involves the concerned party’s submission of the initial proposal. The proposal would bear information such a concise evaluation of the anticipated activity, the dimension of the area to undergo adjustments, the benefits that will accrue from the project and a thorough explanation of why all other areas were not feasible to a level where the investors would only settle for the protected area or park. The minister responsible would then expose the proposal to a sound evaluation against the laid down policy, and in the event, determine whether to decline the proposal or give it a clean bill of rights (Robert, 2018). Further, the public is given an opportunity to interrogate the move and offer insights on whether the project will be of any benefit to them.

The above approach offers a well-guided framework that allows only recreational activities that maintain and preserve biological diversity. Further, the need to facilitate preservation of natural environments and advance the traditional Aboriginal applications coupled with low impact and economically viable activities. The existing rules allow British Colombia to use the latest scientific knowledge to conserve forests and parks. An activity taking place in a forest or park must be subject to forest and environmental laws. The Provincial and Federal agencies ensure laws are followed to the later. The Forest and Range Practices Act guide the process of companies operating on public land in how they demonstrate their abilities to achieve government objectives. Such objectives include the need to protect biodiversity, cultural heritage, water, timber and any other natural aspect of the habitat the companies occupy (Pellet.org, 2011). The companies are held accountable for all their actions and any subsequent impact on the habitat.

Further, park policies in British Colombia have gained traction from the need to preserve the Aboriginal interests and offer a level playing ground for collaboration with the Canadian government and other stakeholders (Turner, 2011). There are treaties that protect Aboriginal people and their conservation rights.

Park policies in Colombia strive to promote stewardship, offer a calculated guide on development, maintenance and renewal of ecologically sensitive parkland and recreational areas. The ultimate goal for such an approach is to design a community Plan that facilitates a diverse and well-guarded system of parks and recreational open spaces that meet community needs while at the same time protecting the environment. The approach comes to play through a range of social, environmental and economic policies that offer a platform to successfully implement those policies. It is imperative to acknowledge the fact that protection of parks is not a one agency affair, and as such, a collaborative approach that engages communities, schools, volunteer organizations and industries just to name but a few come together to make this goal a reality. The involvement of different stakeholders is instrumental in the sense that it allows for the application of knowledge, resources, and expertise by all players. In any event, it cultivates the much- needed environmental stewardship ethics that is essential towards achieving sustainable protection of the environment and increase the knowledge on ecosystem needs of each stakeholder.

The park policies go a long way to minimize threats from human activities. Such activities include construction of recreational facilities like resorts, land clearing, access development, fire, and suppression. Further, the ministry of environment is mandated to consider any land deemed environmentally sensitive and use the policy that guides parkland acquisition program. For instance, the Denman Island acquisition was instrumental in the protection of the coastal biogeoclimatic zone (British Columbia. Office of the Auditor General, 2014). The provincial management ministries keep on evaluating and managing ecological functions through identifying and putting in place measures that protect rare and endangered habitats.

Any form of development in protected areas has to be exposed to “Development Permit Areas”. Areas under this category undergo special requirements and guidelines whenever any form of development has to take place. It is imperative to acknowledge that any form of alteration on such land should undergo this evaluation. The DPA offers a framework that consists of environmental and natural hazards protection that go a long way in reducing chances of environmental pollution. Any commercial, residential or a mixture of both taking place in the protected zones should take place under the guidance of aspects that support water conservation, greenhouse gas reduction and protection of sensitive ecology (Locke, 2017). Any developments in these areas have to be approved by districts officials to pass the DPAs test.

The Official Community Plan (OCP) bylaws came to play in 2011 and offer guidelines and policy framework towards achieving a diverse range of community issues by 2030. It brings forth a strategic action plan that tailors a feasible, cost-effective approach to guard parks and open space. The strategic plan compliments the 1991 draft master plan on Parks and Recreational facilities.

Community involvement and consultation

The district of Vancouver has identified the role the community plays in the protection of parks and open spaces. Therefore, the district has set a platform that facilitates active participation of community members. The community gets a chance to offer its input concerning parks and open spaces.  The platforms are made possible through community planning initiatives, park surveys, Futures conference, and recreational assessment reports. Further, the Parks Department has been cited to host conferences and workshops that foster an environment for dialogue and in the event, provide an opportunity to offer insight and suggestions on the past surveys and studies (North Vancouver District, 2012). The approach affords the community as stakeholders an opportunity to deliberate on contagious issues, and in the event, formulate common objectives that will go a long way in the protection of parks and open spaces.

Provincial policies and tourism

The protected Areas at the provincial level in Canada take shape through the need to support historical and cultural features. Therefore, any activity around the Protected Areas for the purposes of economic activities should take place through a policy framework that guides such activities.  The provincial policies are critical in guiding the process of planning, development, implementation, and management of protected areas. In any case, it offers a platform from where consultations and collaborations come to play to identify, plan and manage protected areas (Manning, 2012). The approach goes a long way in ensuring social-cultural aspect and ecologically sensitive areas receive the necessary protection.

It is instructing to note that ecological conservations, Aboriginal use, recreation and the conservation of natural resources are intertwined. The tourism sector is cited to face high legislation and regulations through the local and provincial policies. The tourism industry plays a critical role in contributing to the economic growth of the provinces where it exists. Therefore, it follows that provincial tourism activities have to align seamlessly with provincial policies if the desired outcome is to take precedent. The two have to find a level playing ground for collaboration to deliver tourism objectives.

In any case, the provincial policies should work to cultivate strategies that enhance the growth of tourism, offer a platform through which the provincial government can interact with like-minded stakeholders to leverage on existing opportunities for economic growth and diversification (Destination British Colombia, 2018). The government policies allow for a platform where “Destination British Columbia” can market Vancouver as a preferred tourist site.

The provincial policies in British Colombia are key in the provision of a sound platform that promotes environmental stewardship. The provincial administration understands very well that tourist is attracted to sites that bear unspoiled, natural, beautiful and unique habitats. Therefore, policies are in place to control and manage any tourism-related activities that may risk the destruction of natural environments. This is where environmental stewardship comes to play. Sustainable development takes shape through factors such as social, economic and environmental conservation cannot take whereas environmental stewardship concentrates on the need to preserve the natural world. It is imperative to understand that tourism-related activities across the globe have been cited to overuse of resources leading to destruction and contamination of natural resources (Nepal & Jamal, 2011). British Colombia understands this all well and as such, it has come out strongly to put in place different regulations to protect protected areas.

The aspect of “First Nations Land” encompasses any land that falls under the Aboriginal title and all management responsibilities are placed under the First Nations group. Park areas are under the management of British Colombia Parks. This agency is mandated to review and issue permits for tourism-related investments to operate in the parks.

The tourism industry and Hospitality

Any company that intends to invest in a national park is required to apply for a permit. However, it is worth noting that the permit comes with restrictions that call for tourism development activities that embrace sustainability and promote the existence of local environment.

The Environmental Assessment Office is tasked with the role of facilitating environmental stewardship in British Columbia. Therefore, any project has to be evaluated on the possible effects on the environment, economic, social, heritage and cultural dimensions and tourism projects on parks are no exception. It is worth noting that there have been conflicts between tourism related projects and other entities coming forth to carry extraction activities such as mining and forestry (Thielmann & Tollefson, 2017). The conflicts have come to play due to differences in the goals of either side. Any tourist project would call for a serene environment that embraces biodiversity, clean environment, and impressive view-landscapes and as such, industrial actions will be a nuisance to the peaceful existence of the anticipated tourist environment.

The tourism industry in British Columbia has been cited to contribute to climatic changes, destruction of habitats and loss of diversity. For example, the winter season between the years 2014-2015 recorded highest temperatures.  Such climatic impacts led to the closure of coastal mountain resorts during this winter season (Webster, 2018). On the same dimensions, provinces exposed to high tourism activities especially in the parks have experienced an unprecedented decline in endangered fauna that are the main attraction points for local and domestic tourists.

The governments concern over the purchase of Grouse Mountain is no surprise given the possibility of the new owner engaging in activities that may lead to the destruction of the biodiversity existing in this Eco-sensitive area. It is imperative to note that any new investor would come forth with a new way of doing things. Given the financial muscle of the China Minsheng Investment Group, the company is likely to carry out a total overhaul of the property to give it a facelift. However, such a move would lead to human activities that will distort an area that has been experiencing tranquility with itself (Bailey, 2017). The government is not opposed to the move and as such, the benefits that come with a new strategic investor in promoting tourism in BC notwithstanding, it remains of utmost importance to find a balance that will facilitate protection of the local community’s interests, environmental, economic, social, cultural and heritage aspects.

The government advocate for a purposeful engagement of the project to policy evaluation holds water. The District of North Vancouver mayor concerns similar projects taking place in the area are valid. He cites an anticipated hotel construction at Grouse on a vast tract of land covering over 500 hectares of land is a valid concern as it will lead to environmental destruction.

All stakeholders have a reason to worry due to the increasing human activities in the District of North Vancouver. If the approach is not well calculated along the laid down policy framework the local communities and the larger tourism sector will suffer in the long run. The destruction of natural habitat in the eco-sensitive areas is prerequisite for disaster. The policy guidelines that govern human activity in the parks should be applied to the letter (Eagles, 2017). Such policies will ensure the preservation of the environment and in the long run, take care of the ecosystem and future generations.

The Vancouver’s Grouse Mountain Resort is a case in point that demonstrates the interaction between park policies and the tourism industry. The policy guidelines exist for the goods and as such, it ensures tourism activities do not go way beyond the expected levels. The communal interests, economic and ecological aspects of any project should stay informed through the park policy (Gardner, 2012). The approach should be a win-win situation where one sector is not getting it all at the expense of the other.

The foreign investors will have the advantage of working in a policy guideline and preserve what they have naturally found in the area. Since the area is rich in the ecosystem and cultural heritage they will be able to receive domestic and international tourists (Matheus & Raimundo, 2017). The local community will benefit from the proceeds of the tourism activities in the area.

Benefits to the community

The British Columbia policy is geared towards ecological balance since it works to determine how ecosystems work, and in the event ensure protection and preservation of the same.  The aspect of giving communities a platform to determine the direction to which they would wish to see the thing working in their environment goes a long way in ensuring their interests come first. The approach is critical in the sense that it cultivates the implication that, local communities will own the initiative, and in any case support the idea to fruition (Stronghill, Rutherford, & Haider, 2015).  Delineating communities from their local environment will precipitate dissatisfaction, and in the event, developing a negative attitude which will eventually lead them in participating in the destruction of the same.

Further, the policies find a balance between the economic activities and ecological needs of the environment. It is worth noting how the capitalist nature of human beings will lead them to put their interest first. Therefore, they will tend to destruct everything today without considering the impact of their actions on the immediate environment or future generations. For instance, human activity may clear all the ecosystem to construct massive and tall buildings towards serving tourist. The approach does not look back to imagine the same ecosystem they are destroying is meant to attract the tourists (Takyi & Seidel, 2017). This highlights the need for a policy that dictates the extent to which human activities on parks and other protected should not exceed.

Further, the collaborative approach between the community and the government serves to beat the interest of minority groups in the society who wish to serve their needs against the larger social benefits. Any project should seek to achieve the highest benefit of the society and cultivate a platform that ensures environmental stewardship and sustainable development.

The policy framework coupled with a collaborative approach in British Colombia province is proactive in nature and as such the authorities will save resources they would use later in the restoration of ecological zones once they have undergone destruction. Preserving and conserving the ecosystem will maintain a constant flow of tourist, unlike a situation where the province may experience gaps due to destruction.

Preservation of cultural heritage is an aspect that once destroyed cannot be restored. Therefore, putting in place policies that ensure such zones are protected is a key aspect of ensuring the province does not lose what it cannot recover. Communities will benefit a lot from collaborating with governmental authorities to preserve aspects they can identify with. People take a lot of pride while associating with their cultural heritage and as such, they would be in the front row to protect it with all their resources and energies. Preserving cultural heritage is a tourism attraction aspect and as such, the local community will benefit a great deal for the proceeds of the same. The local community will have the opportunity to get employment from local resources that serve as tourist attraction sites.

It is worth noting that, permit policies rest the responsibility of restoring a lost aspect of nature in the park areas they are operating (Shultis, 2016). Therefore, as per the B.C  Park Act dictates, the organization responsible   Would have to pay an equivalent amount of money to the destruction done for the purposes of restoring the ecosystem.

How investors re-shape the land

It is imperative to acknowledge the fact that each investor comes with a calculated move to exploit to their level best the resources they find towards realizing optimal returns. Therefore, the approach starts with clearing the land where they would want to invest to create room for their operations. Their actions if not guided will lead to the destruction of local ecosystems and other environmental aspects and in the event, lead change of landscape and habitat. Without denying the fact that their actions may mean well in terms of investment, they forget to balance between their interests and those of the local communities, environmental, social and economic ones (Ministry of Community, Sport and Cultural Development, 2016). The long-term effect will be the dominance of elegant buildings made to host tourists but with no support factors such as ecosystem and natural habitat such as the ones found in parks to support the same. This is where the policy aspect comes in to ensure ecotourism takes care of environmental preservation, support, and involvement of local communities, the creation of environmental awareness to the visitors. The policies come in handy to shape how the tourist investors use the local resources available to them towards supporting local ecosystems and communities (The State of Canada, 2014). In any case, the British Columbia park policies are keen to avoid a scenario where investors make un-informed decisions that aim at achieving industrial and commercial purposes while putting in stake long-term ecological, social and economic goals that can only come to play through a well-thought-out plan to protect parks.

Limitations

There have been challenges in balancing of the aspect of conservations with the ever-changing needs of the community which include but not limited to economic needs for development. Therefore, changing policies to suit such advances remain far from reach. The aspect of adequate funding to support all areas of concern as per the dictates of the policy has been difficult and overwhelming. For instance, the need to carry regular public awareness and capacity building ( Province of British Columbia, 2015).  Some investors especially those with politically connected may influence the outcome of ground assessments and issuance of permits and in the event, manage to destroy the ecosystem without any repercussions for the same.

Ecological considerations

The provincial authorities should ensure regular revision of the existing policies towards ensuring it reflects the immediate needs of communities. Further, the agencies involved should embrace technology to create awareness and seek any public insights online to avoid high costs that are incurred during public forums. There should be a well-calculated framework that engages all stakeholders real-time to avoid delays in reporting of policy deviations from any party. The approach will go a long way in ensuring actions are taken early enough before any damage that may lead to costly and time-consuming restoration approaches.

Conclusion

The value and benefits of nature conservation to tourists, local communities, and the species existing in parks goes unsaid. Therefore, the British Columbia move to come up with policies to protect and preserve parks is a move in the right direction.  The tourist investors are capable of destroying natural vegetation and natural habitats for their immediate gains. Balancing between the needs of nature, local communities and the tourist interest is no mean feat, but it has to be done. British Columbia knows this very well and it has for a long time stood firm to cultivate a balance between such as aspects. The approach has come through the formation of different entities tasked with the needs of different portfolios within the eco-tourism zone. Parks form part and parcel of ecotourism and the British Columbia does not take chances when it comes to protection and the preservation of the same. The intervention has gone a long way to benefit local communities, preservation of the environment, social, cultural heritage and the economic aspects that come with ecotourism. The approach has received a boost through engaging communities and other societies and such collaboration have seen tremendous success in the park preservation. Benefits that the approach realizes include ensuring low issues of climate change, protection to human health, cultural values and heritage just to name but a few. It is imperative to acknowledge that without the policy framework in place, British Columbia would have lost most of its ecosystem, cultural heritage and another aspect of nature to human activities.

References

Province of British Columbia. (2015). Gaining the Edge. Retrieved from British Columbia Tourism Strategy: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/tourism-and-immigration/tourism-industry-resources/gainingtheedge_2015-2018.pdf

Bailey, I. (2017). Local government sounds alarm over development on Vancouver’s Grouse Mountain. Retrieved from The Globe and Mail: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/local-bc-government-sounds-alarm-over-development-on-ecologically-sensitive-grouse-mountain/article35689169/

British Columbia. Office of the Auditor General. (2014). Conservation of Ecological Integrity in B.C Parks and Protected Areas. Retrieved from https://www.bcauditor.com/sites/default/files/publications/2010/report_3/report/OAGBC_Parks%20Report_OUT2.pdf

Destination British Colombia. (2018). Provincial Tourism Strategy and Policy. Retrieved from BC Tourism Industry: https://www.destinationbc.ca/BC-Tourism-Industry/Provincial-Tourism-Strategy-and-Policy.aspx

Eagles, P. (2017). Governance of recreation and tourism partnerships in parks and Protected areas. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 17(2), 231-248. Retrieved from ftp://ftp.puce.edu.ec/Facultades/CienciasHumanas/Ecoturismo/ArticulosTurismo/Art%EDculos%20cient%EDficos/Turismo%20sostenible/Journal%20of%20Sustainable%20Tourism/governance_tourism_nationalparks.pdf

Gardner, J. (2012). First Nations Cooperative Management of Protected Areas in British Columbia: Tools and Foundation. Retrieved from Dovetail Consulting: http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/Library/318433.pdf

Locke, H. (2017). Civil Society and Protected Areas:Lessons from Canada’s Experience. 26, 101-127.

Manning, R. (2012). How Much is Too Much?Carrying Capacity of National Parks and Protected Areas. Monitoring and Management of Visitor Flows in Recreational and Protected Areas, 306-313. Retrieved 2018, from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.196.5530&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Matheus, F., & Raimundo, S. (2017). The results of ecotourism policies in protected areas in Brazil and Canada. SciELO Analytics, 1200-1350. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.7784/rbtur.v11i3.1336

Ministry of Community, Sport and Cultural Development. (2016). Provincial Response. Retrieved from British Columbia: http://www.ubcm.ca/assets/Resolutions~and~Policy/Resolutions/Provincial_Responses-2016_UBCM_Resolutions.pdf

Nepal, S., & Jamal, T. (2011). Resort-induced Changes in Small Mountain Communities in British Columbia, Canada. Mountain Research and Development, 31(2), 89-101. doi:https://doi.org/10.1659/MRD-JOURNAL-D-10-00095.1

North Vancouver District. (2012). The District of North Vancouver. Retrieved from Parks and Open Space Strategic Plan: https://www.dnv.org/sites/default/files/edocs/parks-and-open-space-strategic-plan-final.pdf

Pellet.org. (2011). British Columbia Forest Facts. Retrieved from Naturally: Wood: https://www.pellet.org/images/Parks-and-Protected-Areas.pdf

Robert, I. (2018). BOC Parks. Retrieved from British Colombia: http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/bcparks/PBAProcess/

Shultis, J. (2016). Selected Issues Facing BC Parks:Report to the BC Protected Areas Research Forum. Retrieved from Outdoor Recreation and Tourism Management Program : https://www.unbc.ca/assets/outdoor_recreation_tourism_management/research/ortm305_selected_issues_facing_bcparks.pdf

Stronghill, J., Rutherford, M., & Haider, W. (2015). Conservancies in Coastal British Columbia: A New Approach to Protected Areas in the Traditional Territories of First Nations. Conservation & Society, 13(1), 30-50. Retrieved from http://www.conservationandsociety.org/article.asp?issn=0972-4923;year=2015;volume=13;issue=1;spage=39;epage=50;aulast=Stronghill

Takyi, S., & Seidel, A. (2017). Adaptive management in sustainable park planning and management: case study of the city of Vancouver Parks. Journal of Urban Ecology, 3(1), 540-560. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/jue/juw009

The State of Canada . (2014). Losing ground: time to embrace the true value of parks. Retrieved from The State of Canada’s Parks: http://cpaws.org/uploads/CPAWS_Parks_Report_2014.pdf

Thielmann, T., & Tollefson, C. (2017). Tears from an onion: Layering, exhaustion and conversion in British Columbia land use planning policy. Journal Policy and Society, 28(2), 111-124. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polsoc.2009.05.006

Turner, K. (2011). Conservancies in British Columbia, Canada: Bringing Together Protected Areas and First Nations Interests. The International Indigenous Policy Journal, 2(2), 1-15. Retrieved 2018, from https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1054&context=iipj

Webster, D. (2018). Chapter 10. Environmental Stewardship. Retrieved from Introduction to Tourism and Hospitality in BC: https://opentextbc.ca/introtourism/chapter/chapter-10-environmental-stewardship/