By Peter Christensen

Op-Ed Commentary

With retrospect to the approach taken by the Columbia Valley Recreation Planning Initiative, I was very disappointed to learn from the article in last week’s Pioneer that the initiative’s beginning declaration was that “Everyone agreed that there should be room for all recreationalists.”

This is surely an outdated way to begin a planning process to enable long term ecosystem health.

Following this declaration, the co-chair of the CVRPI then stated that “the status quo is not sustainable.” This statement is a direct contradiction to the “room for all recreation” proposal. The problem to solve is not how to fit “all recreationists” into a limited landscape unit but rather that there is not room for “all recreationists” in the Steamboat Mountain Landscape Unit.

Crown lands have been intensively managed by various provincial agencies for overlapping tenures, seasonal use and one time permits: ranching, logging, Christmas tree production, camping, hunting, fishing, firewood gathering, fence rail cutting, recreation sites, etc. Trained individuals and specialists look at an area in a wholistic manner before allocating permits and locations for these purposes. When carefully considered, there is generally a beneficial path agreed upon.

However, today’s much increased unregulated demand and pressure from the mechanized recreation sector (ATV, Side by Side, bicycles, dirt bikes, motorized rec, random camping, etc.) is challenging all the systems and protocols public lands are managed.

Mechanized recreationists believe it is their right to go wherever they want on public lands, and so they do. While some recreationists respect natural values in principle, there are many who don’t and vividly display their lack of respect.

For instance, at the north end of the Dry Gulch portion of the Columbia Wetlands Wildlife Management Area (CWWMA), designated in 1996 under the Wildlife Act with conservation as its priority. Mountain bikers bullied their way in hacking trails into the fragile dry hillsides and now we are being asked to contribute to a “Dry Gulch Recreation Plan” rather than a conservation plan?  What gives? Is the Wildlife Act to be ignored?

Recreationists seldom think that what they do causes wildlife to leave an area; however, long-term residents have witnessed a steady decline in wildlife and diversity of plant communities in “room for all” areas.  Wildland habitat cannot sustain use by all users without cumulative negative effect.  We are far past an era where everyone can claim rights for their type of recreation in all places at all times.

That said, passionate recreational users need places for their activities. For instance, shooting enthusiasts make use of a designated area at the south end of Steamboat Mountain. Some dirt bike/mountain bike areas have been allocated and other least damage locations need to be identified, in particular away from already designated CWMMA’s like Dry Gulch which have been set aside primarily for conservation.

The current unregulated approach where new users bully their way into protected and critical areas is not working. To continue random activities in active wildlife corridors such as in the Steamboat Mountain Landscape Unit or Dry Gulch Wildlife Management areas because self-identified Recreationists declare that there should be room for everyone is folly. The first layer of a recreation plan should identify and respect wildland values and current management designations.  Additional uses, if compatible, can then be identified.

Let’s not spoil what we have, the challenge now more than ever is to find ways to adapt and/or place mechanized recreation in planned areas that respect functioning and protected ecosystems so that healthy habitat is available and preserved in sensitive areas.

e-KNOW file photo

– Peter Christensen is a long term valley resident and writer.

Article Share