NCC – Climber Talks Inevitable
All winter Ottawa rock climbers traded rumors that the NCC was going to restrict climbing in Gatineau Park. In March a Plan emerged from the NCC which made it official.
Except it’s not.
The Ecosystem Conservation Plan suggests actions to protect Gatineau Park. The NCC has the power to accept, reject or modify each of those suggestions. The NCC legitimately wants to protect Gatineau Park but they want to do it in cooperation with park users. The Plan itself underscores this when it suggests that Park zoning be adjusted to allow rock climbing in specific locations. Appendix 2 of the Plan has a zoning change map that says “…allow rock climbing on two or three rock walls, with an agreement between interested parties to jointly manage this activity.”
There has been an agreement in place with the rock climbers for several years to manage the activity. Anecdotal reports from both the NCC and the climbers indicate that this agreement has been relatively successful and has been respected by the climbers. The problem is that the MOU (memorandum of understanding) has expired now. In order to continue to jointly manage climbing a new agreement will have to be forged. If the NCC wishes to continue the cooperation of climbers it can’t impose an MOU on them unilaterally.
The climbers appear to sincerely wish to protect Gatineau Park, why else would they have signed and respected the earlier MOU. They appear to have some legitimate objections to some of the conclusions drawn in the Conservation Plan.
On Monday the climbing community is holding an info session to discuss the NCC proposals and the climbers’ coalition expects to engage in talks with the NCC. The success of negotiations is important to all of us:
- To the climbers who want to keep climbing
- To the NCC who need collaborative partner organizations not rogue individual park users
- To the ecosystems everyone wants to protect
- To other users for whom the climbing negotiations may serve as a template
Success will take open minds on all sides.
April 15th, 2010 - 14:26
The GPECP is basically a consultant’s report that says “you should do this”. My guess is that the NCC will take interim steps while they figure out how to go from plan to policy. Climbing is one aspect of the plan, but I think they can get a better return on their investment of conservation dollars by initially focusing on other less controversial elements of the plan. There’s a deer problem that probably has a wider ranging impact on the park than the climbers do. Deer management strategies are better understood and easier to implement, so I wouldn’t be surprised to see them start there. Still, they need to hold some public consultation sessions, if for no other reason than to at least appear that they’re listening.
Monday’s meeting will be interesting. Hopefully, there will be some NCC people in attendance.
April 16th, 2010 - 09:28
I don’t think you can speak of open minds at the NCC. From my experience, they collectively suffer from group think and denial–although there are several conscientious individuals working there.
They are unaccountable and will do as they please–especially when considering the CEO is not in charge: she’s just a talking head spewing NCC claptrap.
As for my reading of the Conservation Plan: it was a very painful exercise. A document written by amateurs. No blood, no style … An utter and complete hatchet job. 504 mistakes! (And I’m blaming Marie Lemay for each and every one of those mistakes).
Moreover, much of the Conservation/segregation plan is predicated on keeping people out of the park by invoking the precautionary principle, which essentially boils down to saying “While we don’t have much hard evidence confirming the public is destroying several ecosystems, let’s keep them out, just in case.”
Evidence: the NCC says it will develop a green transportation plan although the “levels of many of the region’s air pollutants are declining as a result of pollution abatement agreements signed by Canada and the United States in the last decade” (p. 22). Totally ass backwards.
According to a senior research fellow at King’s College, the language of precaution comes from the political right. It is he says, the language of paranoia and misanthropy, which boils down to saying: “Action without evidence is justified.”
“The precautionary principle is, above all else, an invitation to those without evidence, expertise or authority, to shape and influence political debates. It achieves that by introducing supposedly ethical or environmental elements into the process of scientific, corporate and governmental decision-making (http://www.durodie.net/pdf/PrecautionaryPrincipleKillingInnovation.pdf).
And although there is ample evidence of the ecological hecatomb perpetrated by park residents(water pollution, habitat fragmentation,erosion of riparian habitats, p. 62), the NCC will not crack down on its friends/masters. Instead, it will target the public (the proper owners of the park) for its conservation/segregation actions.
The NCC’s motto: the people are my enemy, and I shall devise all the means I can to harm them…”
Wow, our very own National Socialist Capital Commission … defiling the cornerstone of a monument dedicated to the 42,000 Canadians who died in WW II.
April 17th, 2010 - 13:29
Words by JP Murray…”Wow, our very own National Socialist Capital Commission … defiling the cornerstone of a monument dedicated to the 42,000 Canadians who died in WW II.”
All blood, no style…no respect!
April 17th, 2010 - 21:40
The blood of the 42,000 who fell for you and me …
And here I was thinking it was a pretty good effort … Tightyly worded, spoken from the heart, smooth transitions, hard-hitting conclusion–though a little exaggerated I’ll admit.
Come to think of it, you’re right; I coulda put a few more flowers in there …