Re: Terms of Reference …

Numéro du REO

011-8197

Identifiant (ID) du commentaire

45495

Commentaire fait au nom

Individual

Statut du commentaire

Commentaire

Re: Terms of Reference (revised) for Wabakimi, Kopka River and Whitesand River Provincial Parks I would like to comment on the Terms of Reference (revised) for Wabakimi, Kopka River and Whitesands Provincial Park, as issued by Ontario Parks on Feb. 22, 2013 (MNR document # 52720). I am an avid canoe-tripper with an educational background in environmental studies. Through my educational background and work experience with both the Ministry of Natural Resources and a non-profit environmental research organization I recognize the importance of comprehensive, transparent resource management processes. I visited Wabakimi Provincial Park for a backcountry canoe trip for the first time in 2012, and look forward to visiting the area many times in the future. I appreciate the opportunity to comment on the Terms of Reference (revised). 1.) I feel strongly that Ontario Parks should extend the WILDERNESS CLASS designation to Wabakimi Provincial Park's expansion zone (1997 boundaries). I realize that the existing commercial outfitter camps in the area may pose some challenges; however, there are recognized solutions such as granting existing businesses “non-compliance” exceptions. As the largest area of intact, protected Boreal forest in southern Canada, Wabakimi plays a vital role in some of today’s key environmental issues. In particular, Wabakimi provides important habitat for endangered woodland caribou, and also helps mitigate climate change by acting as a “carbon sink.” Extending the WILDERNESS CLASS designation will help ensure that the management of the expansion zone fully protects Wabakimi’s ecological values, which were at the core of the original park’s creation in 1983 and again in 1997. 2.) I question why no members of the general public, local residents, or area stakeholders were included on the Planning Team? This seems counter to the original Wabakimi and Kopka River Provincial Park Terms of Reference, which encouraged the continuation of public dialogue. I encourage park planners to ensure that the first management plan for Wabakimi Provincial Park, Kopka River Provincial Park and Whitesands River Provincial Park is developed in an inclusive, transparent, and accountable manner. 3.) Remote WILDERNESS provincial parks like Woodland Caribou and Wabakimi are important recreational resources for canoe trippers. I fully support the development of park map(s) depicting ALL existing canoe routes including connecting Crown land canoe routes, all known interior (backcountry) campsites and access points, as well as resource-based tourism establishments, cached boats and private properties. This sort of material would make Wabakimi more friendly to visitors and would help justify its costly backcountry camping fees. Similarly, I support increased canoe route (portage and campsite) maintenance. Again, with the current cost of backcountry camping fees, these basic services should be offered to visitors. 4.) I DO NOT support the development of new roads and access points within the boundaries of Wabakimi, Kopka River and Whitesand River provincial parks, and would caution against developing road access in areas adjacent to park boundaries. Roads compromise the wilderness values canoeists' expect to experience in provincial parks. Similarly, I DO NOT support permitting the development of new road- or water-accessible resource-based tourism establishments within or adjacent to the park, NOR should existing remote resource-based tourism establishments be permitted to expand their accommodation capacity. These sorts of developments contradict the values associated with remote, wilderness class provincial parks and do not support ecological integrity, the prime tenant of the Provincial Parks and Conservation Reserves Act (2006). If possible, I would appreciate being informed of future opportunities to comment as the planning and management process moves forward.

[Original Comment ID: 156773]