Skip to content
Join our Newsletter

Campaign to save South Chilcotin park stepped up

Cabinet could discuss future of the park as soon as Dec.

Cabinet could discuss future of the park as soon as Dec. 10

Jay MacArthur, the President of the South Chilcotin Mountains Wilderness Society (SCMWS), has heard through the grapevine that the provincial government will discuss the future of a 72,000 hectare park, that was created in the finals hours of the previous government, in a cabinet meeting on Dec. 10.

A government spokesman could not be reached to confirm that the South Chilcotin Mountains are on the agenda, but a decision on the park is expected within the next few months.

"If you have not sent a letter to the premier or your MLA lately, this would be a good time to send another one," said MacArthur.

The government planned to rule on the boundaries of the park in July, but deferred the decision in order to consult First Nations and give the government time to finish its work on a results-based forest practices code, which will replace the existing Forest Practices Code in April of 2003.

Sensing that a decision is near, the debate over the future of the South Chilcotin Mountains park has heated up.

Environmental groups, including the SCMWS, the Western Canada Wilderness Committee, the B.C. arm of the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society, the Sierra Club of B.C., the Valhalla Wilderness Society, and a variety of tourism-related businesses in the area have recently stepped up their campaigns to get the government to recognize the boundaries of the new park. All groups are encouraging members of the public to send letters to the premier and their MLAs as soon as possible.

The park was created by an order in council on the last day of the Ujjal Dosanjh NDP government before the 2001 election, based on two options presented by members of the Lillooet Land and Resource Management Plan after more than five years of discussions.

The so-called conservation option supported the creation of the park, as well as a number of smaller parks, conservation areas and special management zones. The resource option, which was signed off on by forest companies and an appointed representative for mining interests, also supported the creation of a park in the neighbourhood of 42,000 hectares.

After the park was created in cabinet, however, local governments from Lillooet, Lytton, Squamish and Pemberton, as well as the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District, asked that the new government dismantle the park because no economic assessment had been made.

The government commissioned an economic assessment that went on to support the creation of the park, revealing that the area already contributed about $10.5 million to the local economy through tourism and recreation.

A 1991 report made by B.C. Parks on possible sites for new parks was quoted in the economic study to the effect that the South Chilcotin Mountains are "the single most outstanding area of wilderness in the southern interior."

The province did not recognize any of the special management zones outside the park boundaries, and said it would possibly shrink the park as a concession to local resource-based communities.

The loudest voice now opposing the park comes from the mining sector. Although more than 70 years of prospecting in the area has shown that the mineral values in the park area are minimal, the mining industry has made the park decision a line in the sand for the provincial government – a test case that the industry will use to base decisions on future investment in the province.

They believe that the park should be no larger than 3,000 hectares. Anything larger "will be a clear and powerful message that the government has failed to grasp the leadership required to attract meaningful mineral exploration and development investment back to B.C.," according to a leaked correspondence from the Mining Association of B.C. to Minister of Sustainable Resource Management Stan Hagen.

While there is not doubt that the government takes this threat seriously, some new mining investment in northern B.C. seems to contradict the letter. And as mineral values continue to go up, existing mines are being reopened, such as the gold mine at Bralorne.

While the government might not support the entire park, environmentalists don’t believe that the government will go as small as 3,000 hectares, either.

Besides, the environmental groups have one important card up their sleeves, at least until July 13, 2003 – the Vancouver 2010 Olympic Bid.

"Does Premier Campbell want save-the-park protests tailing delegations from the Olympic Committee? Or television carrying reports of sit-downs near Whistler as the IOC deliberates?" asked Joel Connelly, a columnist with the Seattle Post-Intelligencer in the Nov. 25 edition.

A letter from former House of Commons Speaker John Fraser, published in the Nov. 6 Vancouver Sun, suggested that this issue could cost Vancouver and the province the Olympics as well as resource business.

"Located so close to Vancouver, and with B.C. in the Olympic spotlight, this issue has the potential to act as a lightning rod for intense global criticism and market actions," he wrote. "Beyond threatening B.C.’s mining companies, such a confrontation would certainly damage (B.C.’s) $10 billion tourism industry.

"My experience convinces me that this threat to B.C. and its economy could be major and prolonged. In the 1990s, during the height of the Clayoquot protests, I was Canada’s ambassador for the environment and responsible for persuading foreign governments that Canada truly believed in sustainable forestry. I know first-hand the devastating effect a campaign like this has on international market."