Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Political interpretations of Canada’s national parks policy George, Christopher Brock 1974

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1974_A6 G45_9.pdf [ 10.99MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0093131.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0093131-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0093131-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0093131-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0093131-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0093131-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0093131-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0093131-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0093131.ris

Full Text

C • i -POLITICAL IMTERPREJATI OF CANADA'S NATIONAL PARKS POLICY BY CHRISTOPHER BR&K GEOR3E B.S.F., U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1966 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF PIASTER OF FORESTRY IN THE FAULTY OP-FORESTRY We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming to the req u i r e d standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA DECEMBER/ 1973 In p resent ing t h i s t h e s i s in p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t of the requirements fo r an advanced degree at the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that the L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e fo r reference and study. I f u r t h e r agree tha t permiss ion for e x t e n s i v e copying of t h i s t h e s i s fo r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . It i s understood that copying or p u b l i c a t i o n of t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l gain s h a l l not be al lowed without' my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . Department of The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia Vancouver 8, Canada i ABSTRACT The purpose of the study was to d e f i n e a number of s c a l e s t h a t r e l a t e t o the dimensions that a Planner i s concerned w i t h i n planning N a t i o n a l Parks and to see i f Canada's Members of Parliament respond to items on these s c a l e s i n such a way as to define autonomous p o l i c y areas. I t proposed, a l s o , to examine the r e s u l t s a t t a i n e d to see i f the way the p o l i t i c i a n responds i s r e l a t e d to c e r t a i n socio-economic, p o l i t i c a l and park c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . A review of the h i s t o r i c a l development of the N a t i o n a l Parks P o l i c y was c a r r i e d out as a means of i d e n t i f y i n g those p a r t i c u l a r areas of p o l i c y which have been the most c r i t i c a l i n d e f i n i n g N a t i o n a l Park pur-pose. The same p o l i c y areas remain today as those which provide the foundation f o r the p r e p a r a t i o n of v i a b l e plans which a l l o c a t e land-uses i n such a way as to achieve harmony between p r e s e r v a t i o n and use. Seven p o l i c y areas were i d e n t i f i e d from the h i s t o r i c a l review and from the experience of the park planner as c r i t i c a l to planning. These were: park i n t e g r i t y park zoning park access land-based r e c r e a t i o n water-based r e c r e a t i o n u r b a n - s t y l e r e c r e a t i o n park townsites By p u t t i n g i n d i v i d u a l p o l i c y statements i n the form of questions, a s c a l e could be developed, based on a p a t t e r n of responses, which r e l a t e d i i to the p o l i c y areas which had been i d e n t i f i e d . I t was recognized a l s o , that c e r t a i n personal c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and other r e l a t e d f a c t o r s may be important i n understanding how a person responds and would be s c a l e d . A questionnaire was prepared based on the v a r i o u s i n d i v i d u a l p o l i c y statements and was sent t o the Members of the House of Commons, i n order to determine i f they d i d , i n f a c t , d e f i n e the p o l i c y areas i n the same way as the Park Planners. A s e c t i o n s o l i c i t i n g socio-economic and r e l a t e d c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s was included i n the q u e s t i o n n a i r e . Responses to the socio-economic s e c t i o n and the low response r a t e of t h i r t y - t h r e e percent i n d i c a t e d that the sample c o l l e c t e d was not r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of the Member of Parliament at l a r g e . I t was decided, however, to continue to analyze the data, r e a l i z i n g t h a t the r e s u l t s could not be claimed as representa-t i v e . A f a c t o r a n a l y s i s computer program was used to analyze the data. The d e r i v a t i o n of r o t a t e d f a c t o r matrices i n d i c a t e d that the Members of Parliament d i d not view the seven p o l i c y areas as autonomous, rather a s e r i e s of twelve p o l i c y p a t t e r n s emerged which the p o l i t i c i a n i n d e n t i f i e d as important to h i s c o n s i d e r a t i o n of p o l i c y . The twelve were: resource development inconspicuous development t r a n s p o r t a t i o n w i t h minimum impairment maximum t r a n s p o r t a t i o n development no a i r p o r t development t r a d i t i o n a l r e c r e a t i o n a l l - t e r r a i n v e h i c l e s high c o s t , fast-moving water-based r e c r e a t i o n i i i low c o s t , slow-moving water-based r e c r e a t i o n phasing-out townsites by l i m i t i n g development r e t a i n townsites and m a i n t a i n h i g h standards townslte autonomy A f a c t o r score matrix was produced from the computer package which defined scores (both p o s i t i v e and negative) p e r t a i n i n g t o the twelve new p o l i c y p a t t e r n s f o r each respondent. The d i f f e r e n c e s i n scores were then analyzed to determine which c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s accounted f o r the d i f f e r e n c e s i n scores. The Automatic I n t e r a c t i o n Detector (AID) technique was used to i d e n t i f y the independent v a r i a b l e s accounting f o r the d i f f e r e n c e s i n scores. The AID technique provides a means of i d e n t i f y i n g the v a r i a b l e s i n order of i n f l u e n c e f o r each score. I t was not p o s s i b l e , however, to c a t e g o r i z e the v a r i a b l e s r e l a t i v e to the p o s i t i v e and negative scores. A l s o the v a r i a b l e s could not be c a t e g o r i z e d between the twelve p o l i c y p a t t e r n s . Of the t h i r t e e n respondent c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s (independent v a r i -ables) assumed to i n f l u e n c e the responses to the q u e s t i o n n a i r e and the derived scores, ten were found to be i n f l u e n t i a l i n v a r i o u s cases. These were: age income previous occupation education place of childhood number of years as a Member of Parliament i v p o l i t i c a l party province constituency type time of l a s t v i s i t to a N a t i o n a l Park. The remaining three independent v a r i a b l e s : d i s t ance to the nearest N a t i o n a l Park, park age and percentage of constituency having N a t i o n a l Park s t a t u s , were not found to i n f l u e n c e the scores of the Members of Parliament who p a r t i c i p a t e d i n the study. Previous occupation and Province were shown to be i n f l u e n t i a l i n a m a j o r i t y of cases. I t i s concluded that w h i l e the p r o f e s s i o n a l p o s i t i o n of the Park Planner must remain f r e e of p o l i t i c a l c o n s t r a i n t s i n decision-making, the plans must provide r e a l i s t i c a l t e r n a t i v e s to counter the concerns expressed by the p o l i t i c i a n . V TABLE OF CONTENTS I . INTRODUCTION Study Background . 1 Purpose 4 The N a t i o n a l Parks Act and P o l i c y — A B r i e f H i s t o r y 4 1885-1910 4 The D o c t r i n e of Usefulness 6 1911-1930 9 Roads 11 W i l d l i f e 12 1931-1964 14 Post-War 18 The N a t i o n a l Parks P o l i c y 22 P o l i c y P r e s e n t a t i o n (1964) and Subsequent Years 23 The Standing Committee of Northern A f f a i r s and N a t i o n a l Resources — 1966-1971 24 The N a t i o n a l Parks P o l i c y i n the 1970's 27 I I . STUDY SCOPE Conceptual Design 30 Scale D e f i n i t i o n 32 Socio-economic Data 34 I I I . SAMPLING P a r t i c i p a t i o n Questionnaire 35 Study Questionnaire 35 Levels of Response 37 Test f o r Representative Sample 37 v i IV. ANALYSIS OF THE DATA Factor A n a l y s i s . . . 44 Automatic I n t e r a c t i o n Detector Technique (AID) 46 V. RESULTS D e r i v a t i o n of Scores 48 P o l i c y Area 1. (Park I n t e g r i t y ) . 48 P o l i c y Area 2. (Park Zoning) 49 P o l i c y Area 3. (Park Access) 50 P o l i c y Area 4. (Land-based Recreation) 50 P o l i c y Area 5. (Water-based Recreation) 51 P o l i c y Area 6. (Urban-Style Recreation) 52 P o l i c y Area 7. (Park Townsites) 52 I d e n t i f i c a t i o n of C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s A s s o c i a t e d w i t h Scores 53 Resource Development 53 Inconspicuous Resource Development 58 T r a n s p o r t a t i o n w i t h Minimum Impairment 61 Maximum T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Development 63 No A i r p o r t Development 65 T r a d i t i o n a l R e c r e a t i o n 67 A l l T e r r a i n V e h i c l e s 69 High Cost, Fast-Moving Water-Based R e c r e a t i o n 71 Low Cost, Slow-Moving, Water-Based R e c r e a t i o n 74 Phasing Out Townsites by L i m i t i n g Development 76 R e t a i n Townsites and M a i n t a i n High Standards 78 Townsite Autonomy 81 V I . CONCLUSIONS Summary 84 A p p l i c a t i o n t o Park Planning 93 Areas of Future Study 94 V I I . LITERATURE CITED V I I I . APPENDICES Appendix A. Study Questionnaire Appendix B. Factor Score M a t r i x v i i i LIST OF TABLES Table I N a t i o n a l Park V i s i t s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Table I I P o l i c y Areas and Questions . . . . . . . 30-31 Table I I I Representation by Age 38 Table IV Representation by Previous Occupation . 38 Table V Representation by Education 39 Table VI Representation by Number of Years as a Member of Parliament 39 Table V I I Representation by P o l i t i c a l P a r t y 40 Table V I I I Representation by Pro v i n c e 40 Table IX Representation by Type of Constituency 41 Table X Representation by Distance to Nearest N a t i o n a l Park, Proposed N a t i o n a l Park or N a t i o n a l Park Reserve . . 41 Table XI Representation by Park Age 42 Table X I I Representation by Percentage of Constituency as a N a t i o n a l Park 42 Table X I I I D e r i v a t i o n of Dependent V a r i a b l e s (Park I n t e g r i t y ) 48 Table XIV D e r i v a t i o n of Dependent V a r i a b l e s (Park Zoning) . 49 Table XV D e r i v a t i o n of Dependent V a r i a b l e s (Park Access) . 50 Table XVI D e r i v a t i o n of Dependent V a r i a b l e s (Land-Based Recreation) 50-51 Table XVII D e r i v a t i o n of Dependent V a r i a b l e s (Water-Based Recreation) 51 Table XVIII D e r i v a t i o n of Dependent V a r i a b l e s (Park Townsites) 52 Table XIX Respondent C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s Codes 54-56 Table XX C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament f a v o u r i n g Resource Development 58 Table XXI C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament opposed to Resource Development 58 Table XXII C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament favouring Inconspicuous Resource Development 59 Table XXIII C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament opposed to Inconspicuous Resource Development 59-61 Table XXIV C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament f a v o u r i n g T r a n s p o r t a t i o n w i t h Minimum Impairment 61 Table XXV C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament opposed to T r a n s p o r t a t i o n w i t h Minimum Impairment . . . 63 Table XXVI C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament f a v o u r i n g Maximum T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Development 63 Table XXVII C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament opposed to Maximum T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Development 65 Table XXVIII C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament opposed to A i r p o r t Development 65-67 Table XXIX C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament favouring A i r p o r t Development 67 Table XXX C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament f a v o u r i n g T r a d i t i o n a l R e c r e a t i o n 69 Table XXXI C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament opposed t o T r a d i t i o n a l R e c r e a t i o n 69 Table XXXII C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament f a v o u r i n g A l l - T e r r a i n V e h i c l e Use 69-70 i x Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table XXXIII XXXIV XXXV XXXVI XXXVII XXXV I I I XXXIX XL Table XLI Table XLII Table XLII I Table XLIV Table XLV Table XLVI Table XLVII Table XLVIII Table XLIX Table L Table L I Table L I I Table L I I I Table LIV C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament opposed to A l l - T e r r a i n V e h i c l e Use . . . . . . . . . . . 71 C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament favouring High Cost, Fast-Moving Water-Based Rec r e a t i o n . 72 C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f Members of Parliament opposed to High Cost, Fast-Moving, Water-Based R e c r e a t i o n 72 C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament favouring Low-Cost, Slow-Moving Water-Based R e c r e a t i o n . . 74 C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament opposed to Low-Cost, Slow-Moving, Water-Based R e c r e a t i o n 74 C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament f a v o u r i n g Phasing-Out Townsites by L i m i t i n g Development . 76 C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament opposed to Phasing Out Townsites by L i m i t i n g Development 76-78 C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament favouring R e t a i n i n g Townsites and M a i n t a i n i n g High Standards 78-79 C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament opposed to R e t a i n i n g Townsites and M a i n t a i n i n g High Standards 79 C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament favouring Townsite Autonomy 81 C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament opposed to Townsite Autonomy 83 R e l a t i o n s h i p between Resource Development Scores and Respondent C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s 87 R e l a t i o n s h i p between Inconspicuous Resource Development Scores and Respondent C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s 87 R e l a t i o n s h i p between T r a n s p o r t a t i o n w i t h Minimum Impairment Scores and Respondent Character-i s t i c s 88 R e l a t i o n s h i p between Maximum T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Development Scores and Respondent Character-i s t i c s 88 R e l a t i o n s h i p between No A i r p o r t Development Scores and Respondent C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s 89 R e l a t i o n s h i p between T r a d i t i o n a l R e c r e a t i o n Scores and Respondent C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s 89 R e l a t i o n s h i p between A l l - T e r r a i n V e h i c l e Use Scores and Respondent C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s 90 R e l a t i o n s h i p between High Cost, Fast-Moving, Water-Based R e c r e a t i o n Scores and Respondent Character-i s t i c s 90 R e l a t i o n s h i p between Low Cost, Slow-Moving, Water-Based R e c r e a t i o n Scores and Respondent Character-i s t i c s 91 R e l a t i o n s h i p between Phasing-Out Townsites by L i m i t i n g Development Scores and Respondent C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s 91 R e l a t i o n s h i p between R e t a i n i n g Townsites and Ma i n t a i n i n g High Standards Scores and Respondent C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s 92 X Table LV R e l a t i o n s h i p between Townsite Autonomy Scores and Respondent C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . . . . . . . . . 92 Table LVI Summary of R e l a t i o n s h i p between Scores and Respondent C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s 93 x i LIST OF FIGURES Fig u r e 1 AID C l a s s i f i c a t i o n Tree f o r Resource Develop-ment Scores . . . . . . . . . . . 57 Figure 2 AID C l a s s i f i c a t i o n Tree f o r Inconspicuous Resource Development Scores . . 60 Fig u r e 3 AID C l a s s i f i c a t i o n Tree f o r T r a n s p o r t a t i o n w i t h Minimum Impairment Scores 62 Figure 4 AID C l a s s i f i c a t i o n Tree f o r Maximum T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Development Scores 64 Figure 5 AID C l a s s i f i c a t i o n Tree f o r No A i r p o r t Development Scores 66 Figure 6 AID C l a s s i f i c a t i o n Tree f o r T r a d i t i o n a l R e c r e a t i o n Scores 68 Figure 7 AID C l a s s i f i c a t i o n Tree f o r A l l - T e r r a i n V e h i c l e Scores 70 Fig u r e 8 AID C l a s s i f i c a t i o n Tree f o r High Cost, Fast-Moving, Water-Based R e c r e a t i o n Scores 73 Fig u r e 9 AID C l a s s i f i c a t i o n Tree f o r Low-Cost, Slow-Moving, Water-Based Recr e a t i o n Scores 75 Figure 10 AID C l a s s i f i c a t i o n f o r Phasing Out Townsites by L i m i t i n g Development Scores . . . 77 Fig u r e 11 AID C l a s s i f i c a t i o n f o r R e t a i n i n g Townsites and Ma i n t a i n i n g High Standards Scores 80 Figure 12 AID C l a s s i f i c a t i o n Tree f o r Townsite Autonomy Scores 82 1 CHAPTER I  INTRODUCTION 1. Study Background " I f i t i s to serve a worthwhile purpose as f a r as planners and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s are concerned, p o l i c i e s must have s t a b i l i t y and c o n t i n u i t y beyond the term of o f f i c e of a government, the tenure of a p a r t i c u l a r group of se n i o r o f f i c i a l s or the changing demands of commercial i n t e r e s t s . " The i n t r o d u c t o r y statement serves to d e f i n e a p a r t of the p h i l o s o -phy on which the present N a t i o n a l Parks P o l i c y i s based. A government statement of p o l i c y i s two-sided i n that i t must be r e a l i s t i c a l l y conceived — a task f o r the c i v i l servant and, at the same time, p o l i t i c a l l y p a l a t a b l e — a task f o r the Cabinet. The e x i s t i n g N a t i o n a l Parks P o l i c y was presented to the House of Commons on September 18th, 1964, by the then M i n i s t e r of Northern A f f a i r s and N a t i o n a l Resources, the Honourable Arthur L a i n g . The L i b e r a l government rec e i v e d widespread c r e d i t f o r t a b l i n g a statement of p o l i c y which was seen as a very necessary and p o s i t i v e stand w i t h regard to N a t i o n a l Parks. The p o l i c y paper was i n r e a l i t y prepared by the N a t i o n a l Park S e r v i c e . Only c i v i l servants are i n a p o s i t i o n to make choices or produce a p o l i c y simply because other agencies are e i t h e r not aware that a p o l i c y i s necessary or are not s u f f i c i e n t l y Department of Indian A f f a i r s and Northern Development. N a t i o n a l and H i s t o r i c Parks Branch, N a t i o n a l Parks P o l i c y , Ottawa, 1964, p. 3. 2 informed to produce one.^ The general d e f i n i t i o n of the word p o l i c y as, "... a s e t t l e d or d e f i n i t e course or method adopted or followed by a governmental agency 3 or p u b l i c o f f i c i a l , ..." w i l l s u f f i c e . The course defined by the N a t i o n a l Parks P o l i c y was perpetrated by an a d m i n i s t r a t i o n caught i n an expanding s i t u a t i o n . The numbers of v i s i t o r s to the N a t i o n a l Parks had inc r e a s e d , brought about by increased l e i s u r e time and income. This produced a s i t u a t i o n where v i s i t o r numbers alone began to j e o p a r d i z e the n a t u r a l values of the parks and cause increased c o n f l i c t i n park purposes as defined by the N a t i o n a l Parks A ct. The c o n f l i c t i n g purposes are found i n S e c t i o n 4 of the N a t i o n a l Parks Act: "The Parks are hereby dedicated to the people of Canada f o r t h e i r b e n e f i t , education and enjoyment, subject to the pro-v i s i o n s of t h i s Act and the r e g u l a t i o n s , and such Parks s h a l l be maintained and made use of so as to leave them unimpaired f o r f u t u r e generations."^ The ambiguity of the statement of general purpose has l e d to i t s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i n many ways. Decision-makers have attempted to r e c t i f y s i t u a t i o n s as they arose and the v a r i o u s r e g u l a t i o n s i n the Act are an attempt to handle the p r o l i f e r a t i o n of s i t u a t i o n s . I t has been recognized that people can be placed i n three J . E. Hodgetts. "The C i v i l S e r v i c e and P o l i c y Formation", Canadian J o u r n a l of Economics and P o l i t i c a l Science, V o l . 23, 1957, p. 469. I b i d . p. 469. Revised Statutes of Canada. 1952, c. 189, The N a t i o n a l Parks A c t , Se c t i o n 4. 3 c a t e g o r i e s as f a r as t h e i r views on N a t i o n a l Parks are concerned. The wilderness p u r i s t s — that segment of the po p u l a t i o n who view the N a t i o n a l Parks as i n v i o l a t e s a n c t u a r i e s of nature. The organized sport groups and resource developers — that segment of the p o p u l a t i o n who do not r e a l i z e or concede the s p e c i a l nature of N a t i o n a l Parks. They are prepared to a l l o w any development to occur w i t h i n a park, i n c l u d i n g a l l forms of urban r e c r e a t i o n . These two groups are i n a m i n o r i t y and are at opposite ends of the spectrum. The m a j o r i t y of the p o p u l a t i o n , however, f a l l s between these two extremes. The m a j o r i t y viewpoint i s probably c l o s e l y r e f l e c t e d i n the P o l i c y as i t reads today — the acceptance of some development and some urban-styled r e c r e a t i o n but p r i m a r i l y a p o l i c y of nature p r e s e r v a t i o n . The p o l i c y i s not capable of s a t i s f y i n g everyone — l e a s t of a l l the p o l i t i c i a n s whose motives f o r support or o p p o s i t i o n of i t s v a r i o u s s e c t i o n s are probably impossible to enumerate. The N a t i o n a l Parks P o l i c y provides the park planner w i t h the foundation he r e q u i r e s to prepare plans f o r the p r e s e r v a t i o n and use of park lands. The p r o f e s s i o n a l planner's concern i s f o r the i n t e g r i t y of the park i n accordance w i t h i n d i v i d u a l p o l i c y statements. I t i s recognized that c e r t a i n p o l i t i c a l r e a l i t i e s can a l s o p l a y a r o l e i n the development of parks. The assumption i s made that the p o l i t i c i a n ' s view of park development i s based i n p a r t on h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n and understanding of park p o l i c i e s . To date, no attempt has been made to determine i f the way that Members of Parliament view p o l i c y areas are c o n s i s t e n t w i t h the way planners view these same p o l i c y areas. A l s o , no attempt has been made to examine the way that p o l i t i c i a n s do view p o l i c y areas defined i n planning terms and how t h i s r e l a t e s to the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the Members of Parliament. 2. Purpose The purpose of t h i s t h e s i s i s to d e f i n e a number of s c a l e s that r e l a t e to the dimensions that a planner i s concerned w i t h i n planning parks and to see how the p o l i t i c i a n s respond to items on these s c a l e s ; i n p a r t i c u l a r , i f they view them as d e f i n i n g autonomous p o l i c y areas. I t i s a l s o considered important to examine the r e s u l t s a t t a i n e d to see i f the way the p o l i t i c i a n responds i s r e l a t e d to p o l i t i c a l , s o c i o -economic and park c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . I t i s proposed, a l s o , to review the h i s t o r i c a l development of the N a t i o n a l Parks P o l i c y f o c u s i n g on those areas of relevance to the park planner of today. 3. The N a t i o n a l Parks Act and P o l i c y — A B r i e f H i s t o r y  1885 - 1910 The N a t i o n a l Parks of Canada commenced w i t h the r e s e r v a t i o n of a small p a r c e l of land surrounding some hot springs near the s t a t i o n of Banff, A l b e r t a . This land r e s e r v a t i o n of 1885 was near the beginning of the " N a t i o n a l P o l i c y " era which began i n 1878 and c a r r i e d on w i t h only minor v a r i a t i o n s to about 1930. This p o l i c y was concerned w i t h the development of a sound economy based on the e x p l o i t a t i o n of Canada's n a t u r a l resources. The P o l i c y assumed that the resources were l i m i t l e s s : a view which was easy to subscribe to at that p a r t i c u l a r p o i n t i n Canada's h i s t o r y . 5 The Rocky Mountain Park Act of 1887 was enacted to provide l e g i s l a -t i v e s a n c t i o n f o r the r e s e r v a t i o n of lands at Banff Springs and the surrounding area set aside by o r d e r - i n - c o u n c i l s i n c e 1885 and f o r the expenditure made i n 1887 to put the springs i n use."* S i r John A. MacDonald summed up the Government's p o s i t i o n i n s e t t i n g the Banff Springs area aside i n a reserve: "... the Government thought i t was of great importance - that a l l t h i s s e c t i o n of the country should be brought at once i n t o usefulness ..." The Government f e l t t hat expenditures would e v e n t u a l l y b r i n g about the ex i s t e n c e of a la r g e town, "... then there w i l l be a r e n t a l of the waters; that i s a p e r e n n i a l source of revenue, and i f c a r e f u l l y managed i t w i l l more than many times recuperate or recoup the Government f o r any present expendi-..7 ture s . The concept of wilderness was a l i e n to the t h i n k i n g of the time, and t h e r e f o r e , Banff seemed destined to become a renowned r e s o r t , managed by the Government. There were o b j e c t i o n s to the p r o v i s i o n of the Rocky Mountain A c t , however, e s p e c i a l l y w i t h concern to the f a c t that the M i n i s t e r was vested w i t h c e r t a i n powers to a l l o w resource use: "The M i n i s t e r reserves to himself the u n c o n t r o l l e d power to give timber l i c e n c e s and mining l i c e n c e s to anybody, regard-l e s s of the e x i s t i n g Acts on the sub j e c t . How can mining be R. C. Brown. The Doctrine of Usefulness: N a t u r a l Resource and N a t i o n a l Parks P o l i c y i n Canada, 1887-1914. The Canadian N a t i o n a l  Parks: Today and Tomorrow. Paper prepared f o r the conference i n Calgary, A l b e r t a , October 9-15, 1968, p. 5. Canada. Parliament, House of Commons Debates, 1887, V o l . 2, May 3, 1887, p. 233. I b i d . p. 233. 6 c a r r i e d on w i t h i n t h i s d i s t r i c t hand-in-hand w i t h the keeping of the place as a p u b l i c r e s o r t ? You cannot have a p u b l i c park, w i t h a l l the w i l d animals preserved i n i t , and have mining i n d u s t r i e s going on at the same time, you cannot have trade and t r a f f i c , i n v o l v i n g r a i l w a y s going to and from the mines, and at the same time keep the place f o r s p o r t . I f you intend to keep i t as a park, you must shut out trad e , t r a f f i c and mining."8 Concern was a l s o expressed that such a Park could only serve the wealthy; as they alone would be able to a f f o r d the expense of t r a v e l . In f a c t , S i r John A. MacDonald's words f o r e t o l d of the type of person who would be a t t r a c t e d . "As I understand, a p o r t i o n of the park o f f e r s some b e a u t i f u l s i t e s f o r v i l l a s , and I b e l i e v e the p l a n of the a r c h i t e c t l a y s these out, to be leased to people of wealth, who w i l l e r e c t handsome b u i l d i n g s upon them."9 The s t a t e d purpose of the Rocky Mountain Park as enacted on June 23rd, 1887 was to set aside "as a p u b l i c and pleasure ground" some 260 square m i l e s " f o r the b e n e f i t , advantage and enjoyment" of the Canadian people, but the powers were to remain i n the hands of the M i n i s t e r . The D o c t r i n e of Usefulness A study of the annual r e p o r t s of the Superintendents of Rocky Mountain N a t i o n a l Park shows how park a d m i n i s t r a t i v e t h i n k i n g has evolved and how i n the 1970's we have i n h e r i t e d p o r t i o n s of the past. The Annual Report of 1905 i n d i c a t e s the d i v e r s i t y of uses which had I b i d . A p r i l 29th, 1887, p. 195-196. I b i d . May 3rd, 1887, p. 245. Statutes of Canada. Rocky Mountain Parks A c t , Chapter 32, 50-51, V i c t o r i a , June 23rd, 1887, S e c t i o n 2, p. 120. 7 become acceptable i n the Banff park i n i t s 21-year h i s t o r y . The Town of Bankhead had sprung up a few miles east of Banff and served the nearby a n t h r a c i t e c o a l mines. The c o a l mine was described by the park superintendent. "Far from being a detriment to the park, the v i l l a g e of Bankhead adds yet another to i t s many a t t r a c t i o n s , and i s a popular r e s t i n g place f o r v i s i t o r s to and from Lake Minnewanka. " H By 1907, the discovery of deposits of limestone l e d to the establishment of a l a r g e cement p l a n t and the a d j o i n i n g townsite of Ekshaw. Superintendent Howard Douglas reported: "The i n d u s t r i a l assets of the park have been increased s i n c e l a s t year by the establishment of a P o r t l a n d cement m i l l of l a r g e c a p a c i t y . B e a u t i f u l l y s i t u a t e d on a ge n t l e slope over-l o o k i n g Lac des Arcs w i t h a magnificent view i n every d i r e c t i o n , the new Town of Ekshaw, the centre of a great manu-f a c t u r i n g i n d u s t r y , has a r i s e n from the v a l l e y of the Bow R i v e r . The e r e c t i o n of these l a r g e cement m i l l s w i t h i n the park w i l l prove an important step i n b u i l d i n g up of Western Canada." 1 2 The d o c t r i n e of usefulness was to be paramount as these i n d u s t r i a l e n t e r p r i s e s were described i n such terms as " a s s e t s " and " a t t r a c t i o n " and t h e i r s e t t i n g p i c t u r e d as being i n harmony w i t h the n a t u r a l scene. , The i n c l u s i o n of a s e c t i o n e n t i t l e d : The Fauna of the Park, describes "the animal paddock i n which are kept our herd of b u f f a l o and 13 other b i g game as w e l l as the other caged animals." The l i s t of Canada Department of the I n t e r i o r . Report of the Rocky Mountain Park of Canada. 5-6 Edward V I I . Annual Report of 1906. Report of the Superintendent, October 25th, 1905, p. 4-5. 12 I b i d . Annual Report 1907, Report of the Superintendent, September 1 s t , 1906, p. 14-15. 1 3 I b i d . p. 12. 8 species i n c l u d e b u f f a l o , e l k , mountain l i o n along w i t h seven other indigenous species p l u s P e r s i a n sheep; and Angora goats. There i s incl u d e d a st a t u s report on the a v i a r y which was b u i l t to house not only such indigenous species as golden eagles and great horned owls but a l s o three species of Asian pheasants and numerous European s p e c i e s . The s t a t u s of the V i l l a g e of Banff, more e s p e c i a l l y the h o t e l accommodation and the use of the two hot springs was described i n d e t a i l and emphasis placed on the f a c t that the town i s t r u l y a summer r e s o r t . Each annual report l i s t e d the P r o v i n c e , State and Country of o r i g i n of v i s i t o r s to Banff and included an account of revenue accrued to the Government from the hot s p r i n g s , property r e n t s , c o a l r o y a l t i e s , timber dues, l i v e r y and va r i o u s other l i c e n c e s and permits. There i s one i n t e r e s t i n g departure from the d o c t r i n e of usefulness which i s found i n a s e c t i o n of the 1907 rep o r t r e l a t i n g to game p r e s e r v a t i o n . " I would a l s o recommend that no f u r t h e r mining or timber l i c e n c e s be granted w i t h i n the park, f o r the reason that I have found by experience that the establishment of l a r g e camps of men i n v a r i a b l y leads to trapping and snar i n g and i n f a c t to almost every p o s s i b l e breach of laws f o r the p r o t e c t i o n of game."-^ L i k e a l l young n a t i o n s , the c i t i z e n s of Canada were p r i m a r i l y con-cerned w i t h p o l i t i c s and economics. Economic v i a b i l i t y was then based on the primary e x t r a c t i v e i n d u s t r i e s and the great Canadian wilderness seemed w e l l endowed f o r such ventures. The need f o r n a t u r a l parks must have been remote i n the minds of most Canadians s i n c e most c i t i e s and towns were surrounded by w i l d l a n d . The remoteness of the l a r g e western I b i d . p. 16. 9 parks must have been questioned by the m a j o r i t y of Canadians i n the eastern p o r t i o n of the country. The West was synonymous w i t h oppor-t u n i t y , expansion and development. I t was i n t h i s era that the f i r s t N a t i o n a l Parks were enacted as the beginning of a park system — Banff (1885), G l a c i e r (1886), Yoho (1886) and Waterton Lakes (1895). By the year 1911, when important l e g i s l a t i o n a f f e c t i n g the N a t i o n a l Parks was passed i n the House of Commons, the system had been augmented by the a d d i t i o n of B u f f a l o N a t i o n a l Park near Wainwright, A l b e r t a , E l k I s l a n d and St. Lawrence Is l a n d s N a t i o n a l Parks. 1911 - 1930 An important s e p a r a t i o n was w r i t t e n i n t o the Dominion Forest Reserves and Parks A c t , Chapter 10, 1911. P r i o r to t h i s time there had been no d i s t i n c t i v e parks a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . This had been amongst the d u t i e s of the Superintendent of F o r e s t r y w i t h i n the Department of the I n t e r i o r . The Act provided the Governor-in-Council w i t h the power "to designate such reserves or areas w i t h i n f o r e s t reserves as he sees f i t , to be and be known as Dominion Parks.""^ The a u t h o r i t y of the parks was the Commissioner of Parks. The Governor-in C o u n c i l was vested w i t h the power to make r e g u l a t i o n s w i t h regard to p r o t e c t i o n , care and manage-ment of the parks. Regulations could be enforced a l s o p e r t a i n i n g to "conduct of persons r e s i d i n g i n or making use of any park;""^ a l s o to the l e a s e and s a l e of land, trade and t r a f f i c l i c e n c e s and the construc-Statutes of Canada. Dominion Forest Reserves and Parks Act. Chapter 10, 1-2 George V, May 19th, 1911, S e c t i o n 18-1, p. 137. 16 I b i d . S e c t i o n 18-2, p. 137. 10 t i o n , o p e r a t i o n and maintenance of p u b l i c u t i l i t i e s . The Commissioner of Parks appointed at t h i s time was J . B. H a r k i n . Study of the f i r s t ( J u l y 4 th, 1912) and second (September 30th, 1913) reports of the Commissioner are v a l u a b l e documents i n shedding l i g h t on the f u t u r e p o l i c i e s of the Dominion Parks Branch. The Park p o l i c y was elaborated i n the f i r s t r e port w i t h the f o l l o w i n g : "The p o l i c y upon which the Branch i s c a r r y i n g on i t s develop-ment work i s based on the b e l i e f that the m a j o r i t y of the people, Canadians or o t h e r s , who v i s i t the parks are used to some degree of comfort and that no matter how fond they may be of nature they w i l l not take a park tour unless assured of some degree of comfort, convenience and s a f e t y . To meet these c o n d i t i o n s the Parks Branch p o l i c y n e c e s s a r i l y r e l a t e s to the q u a l i t y of the s e r v i c e of whatever k i n d , rendered by those d e a l i n g w i t h the t o u r i s t : character of accommodation; avoidance of congestion; p r o t e c t i o n against e x t o r t i o n ; pro-v i s i o n of minor a t t r a c t i o n s to f i l l i n between the nature t r i p s ; the c o n s t r u c t i o n and maintenance of roads and t r a i l s of f i r s t - c l a s s character i n order that the v a r i o u s a t t r a c -t i o n s may be comfortably and s a f e l y reached; s p e c i a l care i n the matter of dust nuisance and the rough road nuisance; s u p e r v i s i o n over s a n i t a r y c o n d i t i o n s ; water supply, horses and v e h i c l e s , guides, d r i v e r s , charges and r a t e s ; f u r n i s h -ings of f u l l and r e l i a b l e i n f o r m a t i o n ; and, g e n e r a l l y i n not only reducing d i s c o m f o r t s . " 1 ^ There i s evidence that the general view of the advantages of N a t i o n -a l Parks l a y i n the f a c t that they are a c t u a l l y not u n l i k e c i t y parks. The most s i g n i f i c a n t statement to the a f f e c t i s : "The people of Canada p r i m a r i l y secure ' b e n e f i t , advantage and enjoyment' from t h e i r n a t i o n a l parks through the unequalled means of r e c r e a t i o n that they p r o v i d e . N a t i o n a l Parks are to the n a t i o n what l o c a l parks and playgrounds are to a c i t y . Everything that a c i t y park can do as quick a i d to the people, the N a t i o n a l Parks can do more thoroughly and on a l a r g e r s c a l e . Canada. Department of the I n t e r i o r , Report of the Commissioner of Dominion Parks, Annual Report 1912, Ottawa, J u l y 4th, 1912, p. 7-8. I b i d . p. 6. 11 These sentences serve to sum up the a t t i t u d e s of the p o l i c y makers toward the lands w i t h i n t h e i r j u r i s d i c t i o n . The "advantage" was a c t u a l l y a p h y s i c a l e n t i t y i n terms of using the land . The landscape had to be manipulated i n such a way that the p h y s i c a l advantage could become a r e a l i t y . The developments which the park a d m i n i s t r a t o r s sought to i n c l u d e on the landscape were not as d i v e r s e or numerous as were to f o l l o w i n the decade a f t e r these e a r l y r e p o r t s . The a t t i t u d e of advantage of the N a t i o n a l Parks leads l o g i c a l l y to the commercial aspects. The t o u r i s t revenue became a l e g i t i m a t e f a c t o r i n the development of the parks. The r e a l i z a t i o n of l a r g e sums of money spent by t o u r i s t s was to be one of the guiding f a c t o r s i n the p o l i c y f o r park development over many years. Once again the w r i t i n g of Commissioner Harkin sheds l i g h t on t h i s p o l i c y : "The Parks Branch has to develop the N a t i o n a l Parks w i t h the object of making t h e i r wonders and beauties a v a i l a b l e and a c c e s s i b l e f o r the people of Canada. Every f a c i l i t y provided i n that connection n a t u r a l l y i s of equal value to the f o r e i g n t o u r i s t . Therefore the more the Branch can do i n the parks to serve the r e c r e a t i o n requirements of Canadians, the more i t does at the same time to a t t r a c t to Canada a share of the hundreds of m i l l i o n s that the p u b l i c spends annually on recr e a t i o n . " 1 9 The parks were destined to become n a t i o n a l r e c r e a t i o n grounds. Rec r e a t i o n was t o be u n l i m i t e d . This i n time l e d to the c o n s t r u c t i o n and development of f a c i l i t i e s and means of access. Roads The automobile was r a p i d l y becoming an important i n f l u e n c e on t r a n s p o r t a t i o n throughout North America. This f a c t was q u i c k l y I b i d . p. 7. 12 recognized and incorporated i n the o v e r a l l p o l i c y of development of parks f o r " n a t i o n a l r e c r e a t i o n " and to increase the flow of t o u r i s t d o l l a r s . The 1913 rep o r t s t a t e s : "The Parks Branch i s shaping i t s development work on l i n e c a l -c u l a t e d to make the u n r i v a l l e d scenery of the Rockies a c c e s s i b l e to automobile t r a f f i c . C o n s i d e r a t i o n of the expansion of recent years w i t h respect to motors and motoring cannot f a i l to con-v i n c e one that adequate trunk roads through the mountains w i l l i n e v i t a b l y mean a huge automobile t r a f f i c and consequently a l a r g e expenditure of money by a u t o i s t s . " 2 0 W i l d l i f e The p o l i c y on w i l d l i f e was a l s o concerned w i t h the advantage to the v i s i t o r . The p r e s e r v a t i o n of w i l d l i f e was e x t o l l e d i n each annual r e p o r t as one of the purposes of n a t i o n a l parks. The p o l i c y (and a t t i t u d e ) of pre s e r v i n g w i l d l i f e as given i n the 1915 annual r e p o r t was: "The p r o t e c t i o n of w i l d l i f e i n t h i s park (Banff) adds enormously to i t s r e c r e a t i o n a l v a l u e , and from the pur e l y commercial standpoint i t pays because i t i s today a t t r a c t i n g and w i l l continue to a t t r a c t i n succeeding years the d o l l a r s of the t o u r i s t . People love to look at w i l d animals. The crowds that c o n s t a n t l y surround cages i n zoos show t h i s , but the a t t r a c t i o n of animals i n t h e i r w i l d s t a t e i s immeasurably greater."21 The need f o r a zoo and a v i a r y at Banff had been recognized pre-v i o u s l y . The zoo was constructed i n 1908 and the a v i a r y i n 1905. Both compounds contained not only a v a r i e t y of indigenous species but a l s o e x o t i c s . The reason f o r t h i s p o l i c y i s not given but presumably there was no reason that e x o t i c s should not be in c l u d e d i n view of the a t t i t u d e towards w i l d l i f e as quoted above. I b i d . Annual Report 1913, Ottawa, September 30th, 1913, p. 6. I b i d . Annual Report, 1915, Ottawa, June 30th, 1915, p. 10. 13 A p a r t i c u l a r p a r t of the p o l i c y regarding w i l d l i f e which i s d i f f i -c u l t to r e c o n c i l e i s the d i v i s i o n of w i l d animal species i n t o man-given categories of w i l d l i f e and predators. Under the heading of w i l d l i f e i n the r e p o r t s ; there i s a d i s c u s s i o n of such species as bighorn sheep, e l k , b u f f a l o and b l a c k bear. The rep o r t describes how tame they are becoming and how p l e n t i f u l . The s e c t i o n d i s c u s s i n g predators shows an opposite view. The hypocrisy of t h i s i s best shown i n a statement contained i n the 1919 r e p o r t . "We have been f o r t u n a t e i n developing a game warden s e r v i c e which possesses an e n t h u s i a s t i c love f o r w i l d l i f e and the success of the game p r o t e c t i o n p o l i c y i s undoubtedly due to t h e i r f e a r l e s s and r e l e n t l e s s enforcement of the r e g u l a t i o n s , as w e l l as to t h e i r a c t i v e p u r s u i t of predatory animals such as c o y o t e s . " 2 2 An e a r l i e r annual r e p o r t noted that the game wardens had been issued w i t h r i f l e s and ammunition. I t was s t a t e d that t h i s would put them "... i n a much b e t t e r p o s i t i o n to destroy any carnivorous animals 23 that may come across ..." The l i s t i n c l u d e d wolves, l y n x , mountain l i o n s and coyotes. B u f f a l o N a t i o n a l Park near Wainwright, A l b e r t a , was an a d d i t i o n to the system i n 1907 w i t h the purpose of p r o v i d i n g a sanctuary f o r b u f f a l o . The animals i n the enclosed park of 430 square miles i n c l u d e d 620 head of b u f f a l o , a l s o a number of moose, e l k , deer and antelope. The term sanctuary e v i d e n t l y meant the need to i n i t i a t e a predator c o n t r o l program and the success of which was t y p i c a l of that reported i n the 22 I b i d . Annual Report 1919, Ottawa, p. 43. 23 I b i d . Annual Report 1912, Report of Chief Superintendent of Dominion Parks, Edmonton, p. 16. 14 1918 annual r e p o r t : " I t was decided to make use of t r a i n e d hounds f o r the extermination and about 65 coyotes were destroyed, or n e a r l y three 2 A-times as many as had been secured by traps during the previous year." This e a r l y p e r i o d i n the development of parks w i t h the emphasis on the commercial r e c r e a t i o n aspect and i t s b e n e f i t to t o u r i s t revenue continued unchecked throughout the 1920's and reached a climax i n the 1930's. This whole p e r i o d l e f t the present generation w i t h a legacy of f a c i l i t i e s and developments many of which are questioned today. By 1930, the N a t i o n a l Parks system encompassed fourteen areas. The N a t i o n a l Parks Act was enacted i n that year; s e r v i n g to e s t a b l i s h a d i s t i n c t a d m i n i s t r a t i v e e n t i t y . The Act defined the boundaries of e x i s t i n g parks and set out p r o v i s i o n s f o r t h e i r management. The b a s i c purpose of the N a t i o n a l Parks was not changed i n any way from the 1911 Act. In S e c t i o n 4, the purpose of the N a t i o n a l Parks i s noted: "The Parks are hereby dedicated to the people of Canada f o r t h e i r b e n e f i t , education and enjoyment, subject to the pro-v i s i o n s of t h i s Act and the Re g u l a t i o n s , and such Parks s h a l l be maintained and made use of so as to leave them unimpaired f o r the enjoyment of f u t u r e generations."25 The Act i s i n no way r e s t r i c t i v e and the purpose i s subj e c t to p o l i c y d e f i n i t i o n by the va r i o u s m i n i s t e r s and governments which were to f o l l o w . 1931 - 1964 This t h i r t y - y e a r p e r i o d witnessed the greatest changes i n p o l i c y I b i d . Annual Report, 1918, Ottawa, p. 43. Statutes of Canada. The N a t i o n a l Parks A c t , Chapter 33. 15 i n the h i s t o r y of the N a t i o n a l Park system. The 1930's saw the use of unemployed men i n programs of c o n s t r u c t i o n i n the Parks and the i n c o r p -o r a t i o n of the Fe d e r a l t o u r i s t bureau i n t o the Parks Branch. The Unemployment R e l i e f Act of 1930 brought about the h i r i n g of l a r g e numbers of unemployed to work on various programs i n the Parks. The men working under the Act continued through u n t i l 1940. During t h i s ten-year p e r i o d there was a major program of c o n s t r u c t i o n i n c l u d i n g roads, t r a i l s , r e c r e a t i o n f a c i l i t i e s and government b u i l d i n g s . The 1936 Annual Report shows a v a r i e d c r o s s - s e c t i o n of p r o j e c t s which had been c a r r i e d out during the previous years. The n e c e s s i t y of p r o v i d i n g work became the important f a c t o r and consequently today we have acquired many developments which are not compatible w i t h the pur-pose of the Parks. Such developments i n c l u d e the c o n s t r u c t i o n of a i r -c r a f t l a n d i n g f i e l d s , g o l f courses, community b u i l d i n g s , c h i l d r e n ' s playgrounds and manicured gardens. The system has a l s o acquired a l a r g e number of developments which have proven to be most compatible w i t h the present changing emphasis i n Parks p o l i c y . This category inc l u d e s the myriad of t r a i l s , s h e l t e r s , warden's cabins and roads to v a r i o u s n a t u r a l f e a t u r e s . The t o u r i s t bureau of the N a t i o n a l Development Bureau was p a r t of the N a t i o n a l Parks Branch f o r two y e a r s , from 1933 to 1935. The bureau was a separate e n t i t y from the P u b l i c i t y D i v i s i o n of the Parks S e r v i c e but the f a c t that the two were pa r t of the same Branch i s noteworthy. I t serves to r e i n f o r c e the a t t i t u d e of N a t i o n a l Parks as a t o u r i s t revenue agency which had j u d i c i o u s l y been c u l t i v a t e d by Commissioner Harkin. 16 The work of the P u b l i c i t y D i v i s i o n of the Park S e r v i c e was i n the words of the Commissioner — " a c t i v e and aggressive." The f o l l o w i n g o u t l i n e of a c t i v i t i e s i n d i c a t e s the type and extent of work c a r r i e d out i n one year, 1934. The motion p i c t u r e l i b r a r y contained some 799 p r i n t s and were on loan to "various o r g a n i z a t i o n s , notably conservation s o c i e t i e s , business c l u b s , u n i v e r s i t i e s , churches, schools and the l i k e , 26 i n c l u d i n g v o lunteer l e c t u r e r s . " The d i s t r i b u t i o n l i s t i n c l u d e d agencies i n 10 c o u n t r i e s . There was a l s o a program f o r the p r e p a r a t i o n of s l i d e shows, l e c t u r e s , r a d i o p u b l i c i t y , the w r i t i n g of o r i g i n a l musical compositions, d i s t r i b u t i o n of pamphlets and e x h i b i t s a t v a r i o u s f a i r s and e x p o s i t i o n s . P r i n c e A l b e r t and R i d i n g Mountain N a t i o n a l Parks, which were e s t a b l i s h e d i n the years j u s t p r i o r to the Depression, were to r e c e i v e the maximum e f f e c t s of t o u r i s t promotion and unemployment r e l i e f work. The general c o n d i t i o n s of the time were such as to see a decrease i n park v i s i t o r s throughout the system. These two parks developed, there-f o r e , g e n e r a l l y along the l i n e s of r e g i o n a l parks. The emphasis was on l o c a l r e c r e a t i o n and the p r o v i s i o n of summer cottages. The number of v i s i t s showed f l u c t u a t i o n s during the middle 1930's as a consequence of the general economic c o n d i t i o n . The l e v e l of a c t i v i t y during the years of World War I I was f o r a slow i n c r e a s e i n v i s i t o r s each year, mostly from the l o c a l r e g i o n . Three w i l d l i f e N a t i o n a l Parks were removed from the system i n the per i o d immediately p r i o r to and during the Second World War. The f i r s t Canada. Department of the I n t e r i o r , N a t i o n a l Parks Branch, Report of the Commissioner. N a t i o n a l Parks of Canada, Ottawa, 1934, p. 13. 17 was Wawaskesy N a t i o n a l Park i n southern A l b e r t a . I t had been an unfenced reserve comprising 54 square m i l e s . The Park was e s t a b l i s h e d i n 1922 as a sanctuary f o r prong-horned antelope, a species n a t i v e to the r e g i o n . By 1938, the number of antelope had g r e a t l y increased to the p o i n t where i t was deemed not necessary to continue the reserve. Consequently i t was decided to a b o l i s h Wawaskesy N a t i o n a l Park and a l l o w the area to r e v e r t to the Province. This was accomplished by an Act of Parliament assented to on June 24th, 1938. The second park to be abolished was B u f f a l o N a t i o n a l Park near Wainwright, A l b e r t a . The continued animal sl a u g h t e r had not prevented the d e t e r i o r a t i n g range c o n d i t i o n s or decreased the number of disease in c i d e n c e s . In 1939, i t was decided to e l i m i n a t e a l l the l a r g e animals i n the Park. A t o t a l of some 5,000 b u f f a l o , e l k , deer, moose and yak were slaughtered. The land i n the Park was set aside f o r war purposes i n 1940 by the Department of N a t i o n a l Defence. Nemiskan N a t i o n a l Park was e s t a b l i s h e d i n 1922 as a sanctuary f o r prong-horned antelope. The 8.5 square m i l e area remained i n existence u n t i l 1944. The land was removed from park s t a t u s because the antelope were no longer threatened w i t h e x t i n c t i o n . The years 1940 to 1945 were c h a r a c t e r i z e d by slow development of the park system. The l e v e l s of v i s i t a t i o n d e c l i n e d and f i n a n c i a l r e s t r i c t i o n s allowed f o r only minimal expenditures. The demand on park f a c i l i t i e s and v a r i o u s resources a c t u a l l y increased s i n c e the average park v i s i t o r was s t a y i n g f o r longer periods than i n previous years. A t r a d i t i o n a l r o l e of the N a t i o n a l Parks which had developed over the years was t h e i r use as a l o c a l s p orts and general entertainment 18 centre. The Annual Reports have recorded the v a s t array of a c t i v i t i e s which one normally a s s o c i a t e s w i t h urban areas being promoted i n parks. These a c t i v i t i e s i n c l u d e : l o c a l boating regattas and races, tennis and g o l f tournaments, winter c a r n i v a l s and conventions. Post-War The post-war p e r i o d i n a l l p a r t s of Canada was e s s e n t i a l l y a boom pe r i o d . This phenomena was a l s o f e l t i n the N a t i o n a l Park system. Not only was there increased development and expenditures on the p a r t of the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , but there was a f l o o d of v i s i t o r s . I t was t h i s f l o o d of v i s i t o r s which was to b r i n g about s e r i o u s c o n s i d e r a t i o n of the f u t u r e r o l e of the N a t i o n a l Parks. The problem was one of p o l i c y . Could the system continue to be the p r o v i d e r of a l l the d e s i r e d forms of outdoor r e c r e a t i o n ? The l e v e l of v i s i t a t i o n showed phenomenal growth as noted i n Table I . Table I . N a t i o n a l Parks V i s i t s Year Number of V i s i t s 1940 884,386 1945 550,369 1950 1,795,138 1955 3,305,149 1960 4,930,648 1965 9,845,283 1970 - 12,822,095 I t i s s i g n i f i c a n t to study the t o t a l p o p u l a t i o n of Canada and v i s i t o r attendance i n the parks compared w i t h the acreage.of the N a t i o n a l Parks. Parks e s t a b l i s h e d between the t u r n of the century and 19 up u n t i l the 1920's were s u f f i c i e n t to maintain a r e l a t i v e l y high r a t i o of park acreage to p o p u l a t i o n and v i s i t o r s throughout the 1930's and 1940 ?s. In the years f o l l o w i n g World War I I , the in c r e a s e i n a t t e n -dance f a r o u t s t r i p p e d the normal growth r a t e of the p o p u l a t i o n and the r e s u l t was the extreme d e c l i n e i n r a t i o of park acreage to v i s i t o r s . There was 0.7 acres of N a t i o n a l Park (excluding Wood B u f f a l o N a t i o n a l Park) per c a p i t a i n 1931. By 1966 t h i s f i g u r e had f a l l e n to l e s s than 0.4 acres. The N a t i o n a l Park acreage per v i s i t o r i n the same p e r i o d f e l l from 12.4 acres i n 1931 to 0.67 acres i n 1966. The c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the post-war park v i s i t o r have been c i t e d i n a number of papers on the subject of outdoor r e c r e a t i o n i n the past decade. A p o p u l a t i o n which had more l e i s u r e time, more income and greater m o b i l i t y l e d to a need f o r a reassessment of the f u t u r e p o l i c i e s and r o l e of the N a t i o n a l Parks. I t became obvious that the N a t i o n a l Parks were to a greater or l e s s e r degree i n danger of l o s i n g those q u a l i t i e s which i n i t i a l l y a t t r a c t e d the v i s i t o r s . Scenic fe a t u r e s were l o s i n g t h e i r a e s t h e t i c appeal and were s u f f e r i n g p h y s i c a l l y from too many people. The town-s i t e s were a t t r a c t i n g v i s i t o r s i n t h e i r own r i g h t and s t i l l s e r v i n g the park v i s i t o r . T y p i c a l l y the townsites of the mountain parks had become small urban centres w i t h a l l the problems which are generated by such s t a t u s . These problems e s s e n t i a l l y were b u i l t i n t o the d u a l i t y of Se c t i o n 4 of the N a t i o n a l Parks Act. The problems were recognized at many l e v e l s but there was the usual time l a g f a c t o r of some f i v e years before a p o l i c y was presented to the p u b l i c . The Honourable A l v i n Hamilton, 20 M i n i s t e r of Northern A f f a i r s and N a t i o n a l Resources from 1957 to 1960 under the conservative Government of the Right Honourable John G. Diefenbaker, spoke of the s p e c i f i c problem of r e c r e a t i o n i n N a t i o n a l Parks. He made reference to the f a c t that r e c r e a t i o n needs were be-coming more p r e s s i n g throughout Canada. The p u b l i c looked at the N a t i o n a l Parks to provide t h i s f u n c t i o n ; but there were s e r i o u s i m p l i c a t i o n s . Mr. Hamilton s t a t e d : "... i f the N a t i o n a l Parks concept i s to s u r v i v e the crushing demand f o r popular forms of outdoor r e c r e a t i o n . there must be a p a r a l l e l development at p r o v i n c i a l and other l e v e l s of government by every p o s s i b l e means. The N a t i o n a l Parks cannot do the whole j o b ; what we need i s an i n t e g r a t e d system of n a t i o n a l , p r o v i n c i a l and mu n i c i p a l parks which w i l l meet the demand of i t s c i t i z e n s . " 2 7 The ideas of a d i v i s i o n i n the r e c r e a t i o n f u n c t i o n was elaborated f u r t h e r during the speech. I t served to provide a break i n the tangle of problems stemming from the mandate given the N a t i o n a l Parks adminis-t r a t i o n . One of the reasons f o r the re q u i r e d d i v i s i o n was "... to guarantee p r e s e r v a t i o n of e x i s t i n g and f u t u r e N a t i o n - a l Parks according to the o r i g i n a l i n t e n t . Already i n s e v e r a l of the N a t i o n a l Parks there i s an overshadowing of the park's o r i g i n a l purpose by mass r e c r e a t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s which are not always compatible. This trend w i l l i n c r e a s e g r e a t l y i n the f u t u r e and might w e l l threaten the e x i s t e n c e of N a t i o n a l Parks as i n v i o l a b l e s a n c t u a r i e s of s c e n i c  beauty."28 The M i n i s t e r spoke g e n e r a l l y about N a t i o n a l Parks p o l i c y during the 1960 Department Supply Debate i n the House of Commons. Hansards f o r Department of Northern A f f a i r s and N a t i o n a l Resources. Recreation  and T o u r i s t Development: an address by the Honourable A l v i n Hamilton at the Convocation Banquet of the 1959 Convention of the P u b l i c School Trustees, A s s o c i a t i o n of O n t a r i o , F o r t William, O n t a r i o , 1959, p. 9. I b i d . p. 10. 21 J u l y 23rd, 1960 records the f o l l o w i n g remarks by Mr. Hamilton: "Hon. Members should be aware of the fundamental purpose of the parks, which i s to preserve, as they were i n the begin-n i n g , those b e a u t i f u l s c e n i c areas of our country i n order that our c h i l d r e n and our c h i l d r e n ' s c h i l d r e n f o r genera-t i o n s to come may go there and f i n d c e r t a i n areas where the country i s the same as i t s o r i g i n a l d i s c o v e r e r s found i t . That i s the primary purpose of the N a t i o n a l Parks. At the same time there i s a second f u n c t i o n of those r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of the parks, and th a t i s how to make these b e a u t i f u l places as a c c e s s i b l e to the Canadian people as p o s s i b l e . There i s a c l a s h between these two purposes. The park department has had to stand up i n favour of these b a s i c purposes against those f o r c e s which would l i k e to e x p l o i t the parks and use up a l l t h e i r resources q u i c k l y i n t h e i r l i f e t i m e and leave nothing f o r f u t u r e generations that w i l l f o l l o w . I , as M i n i s t e r , want to make i t abundantly c l e a r that I stand f o r the primary purpose of these parks. At the same time I w i l l do every-t h i n g p o s s i b l e to make these b e a u t i f u l parks a v a i l a b l e to the people of Canada as they have a f u l l conception of what they are there for."29 The M i n i s t e r spoke f u r t h e r of pressures upon parks and the f a c t that there i s a need to recognize that there are many areas outside the parks which could provide f o r many of the d i v e r s i o n s , e s p e c i a l l y 30 "honky tonk r e c r e a t i o n " which people demand. The M i n i s t e r continued h i s speech w i t h reference to those members of Parliament who represent c o n s t i t u e n c i e s which c o n t a i n a park: " I know that hon. members who represent park c o n s t i t u e n c i e s are co n s t a n t l y under pressure from the people of the area to t r y to get c e r t a i n changes made i n park operation s , but I should l i k e those members to be a l l i e s of mine — men who stand at my r i g h t and l e f t , as M i n i s t e r , to t e l l the people b o l d l y and c l e a r l y what these parks are f o r — so they w i l l be given what they want, i f p o s s i b l e , provided i t i s i n harmony w i t h the purposes of the parks. I f hon. members do t h a t , I t h i n k they w i l l f i n d Canada. Hansard's House of Commons f o u r t h Parliament, 8-9 E l i z a b e t h I I I b i d . p. 6857. Debates, T h i r d Session - Twenty-Volume V I , 1960, p. 6857-8. 22 that 90 per cent of the people i n t h e i r areas w i l l be behind them."31 The N a t i o n a l Parks P o l i c y A major step to the i n i t i a t i o n of the N a t i o n a l Parks P o l i c y came i n 1962 under the recommendations of the Glassco Royal Commission on Government Organ i z a t i o n . The Commission discussed the b a s i c problem f a c i n g the N a t i o n a l Parks Branch. The q u a l i t y of the Act i s s t a t e d as: "... somewhat of a c o n t r a d i c t i o n of terms, and the p r o v i s i o n of amenities and r e c r e a t i o n a l f a c i l i t i e s f o r the f i v e m i l l i o n people who annually v i s i t the park has, of n e c e s s i t y , brought about p h y s i c a l changes i n the countryside which rob i t , i n p a r t , of i t s v i r g i n c h a r a c t e r . These two s t a t u t o r y o b j e c t i v e s may w e l l become i n c r e a s i n g l y i r r e c o n c i l a b l e as p u b l i c use i n c r e a s e s , w i t h an accompanying f u r t h e r development of the nine e x i s t i n g townsites and continued c o n s t r u c t i o n of roads and t r a i l s throughout park areas."32 The two s p e c i f i c recommendations were: "1. A review be made of N a t i o n a l Park P o l i c y and a compre-hensive statement of f u t u r e goals be i n c o r p o r a t e d i n the r e l e v a n t l e g i s l a t i o n . 2. The N a t i o n a l Parks be administered by a commission w i t h members chosen from outside the p u b l i c s e r v i c e , appointed f o r s p e c i f i c terms and renumerated f o r t h e i r s ervices."33 The N a t i o n a l and H i s t o r i c Parks Branch began committee meetings i n 1960 to produce a p o l i c y statement. The committee was appointed by the D i r e c t o r of the N a t i o n a l and H i s t o r i c Parks Branch. Members i n c l u d e d four d i v i s i o n c h i e f s — Canadian W i l d l i f e S e r v i c e , Operations, I b i d . p. 6858. Canada. The Royal Commission on Government Org a n i z a t i o n , Volume 2, 1962, The Queen's P r i n t e r , Ottawa, p. 37. I b i d . p. 40. 23 Engineering and P l a n n i n g , the Executive Secretary to the Deputy M i n i s t e r , the P o l i c y Committee Secretary and the Chairman, Mr. J . R. B. Coleman, Branch D i r e c t o r . The Executive Secretary to the M i n i s t e r of Northern A f f a i r s and N a t i o n a l Resources attended the meetings i n a l i a i s o n f u n c t i o n . The p o l i c y statement was prepared i n d r a f t form and during 1960 -1961 was reviewed by v a r i o u s s e c t i o n s of the Branch and by the Deputy M i n i s t e r . I t underwent review four times by the r e g i o n a l o f f i c e s i n Calgary and H a l i f a x . The Superintendents of the v a r i o u s parks prepared two reviews. This process of d r a f t p r e p a r a t i o n and review continued through to 1964. P o l i c y P r e s e n t a t i o n (1964) and Subsequent Years The f i n a l d r a f t was accepted and a submission by the Honourable Arthur L a i n g , M i n i s t e r of Northern A f f a i r s and N a t i o n a l Resources, was sent to Cabinet f o r i t s approval on A p r i l 13th, 1964. The L i b e r a l Cabinet under Prime M i n i s t e r L e s t e r B. Pearson approved the ten-point d r a f t on J u l y 2nd, 1964. The ten p o i n t s were the c a r d i n a l s e c t i o n s of the p o l i c y statement. Cabinet approval was necessary s i n c e t h i s p o l i c y was n a t i o n a l i n scope and was to be b a s i c to development and adminis-t r a t i o n of the parks. The a c t u a l contents of the submission are c l a s s i f i e d by government as c o n f i d e n t i a l . The Honourable Arthur Laing presented a statement on N a t i o n a l Parks P o l i c y as p a r t of the Departmental debate of September 18th, 1964. The M i n i s t e r made reference to the f a c t that the Government had r e c e n t l y approved i n p r i n c i p l e a statement of p o l i c y which had been submitted f o r approval. The Cabinet p o s i t i o n was that " t h i s statement expresses 24 the Government's o p i n i o n on the best manner i n which the parks can best 34 be operated, developed and administered to serve the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t . " Mr. Laing discussed the major p o i n t s of the new p o l i c y i n c l u d i n g the purpose of N a t i o n a l Parks, access, v i s i t o r s e r v i c e s , r e c r e a t i o n and residence. One of the most important p o i n t s i n the speech was the appeal f o r support of the N a t i o n a l Parks P o l i c y . He summed up h i s appeal w i t h the f o l l o w i n g remarks: " P u b l i c understanding and support are necessary i f the Government i s to continue i t s stewardship of the N a t i o n a l Parks under a p o l i c y that serves a n a t i o n a l i n t e r e s t . I s i n c e r e l y t r u s t that not only every member of t h i s committee w i l l support i n p r i n c i p l e that p o l i c y we are f o l l o w i n g on the N a t i o n a l Parks, but a l s o that every Canadian w i l l a s s i s t i n p r e s e r v i n g h i s n a t i o n a l h e r i t a g e by understanding, r e s p o n s i b l e and a p p r e c i a t i v e use, and v i g i l a n c e . " 3 5 Support was immediate as the p o l i t i c a l p a r t i e s , newspaper e d i t o r i a l s , o r g a n i z a t i o n statements and i n d i v i d u a l s spoke out i n favour of the p o l i c y . The o p p o s i t i o n to the p o l i c y was fragmented and g e n e r a l l y revolved around the s p e c i f i c problem of leas e h o l d s . The Standing Committee of Northern A f f a i r s and N a t i o n a l Resources — 1966-1971  The Standing Committee was e s t a b l i s h e d to review problems and estimates under the Department i n c l u d i n g Northern A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , Indian-Eskimo A f f a i r s , N a t i o n a l Parks and Canadian W i l d l i f e S e r v i c e . The Committee hearings began on March 31st, 1966 as par t of the F i r s t Session - Twenty-Seventh Parliament and provided f o r evidence to be Canada. House of Commons Debates, Second Session - Twenty-sixth Parliament, 13 E l i z a b e t h I I , Volume V I I , 1964, Ottawa, p. 8192. 35 I b i d . p. 8195. 25 presented by p r i v a t e i n d i v i d u a l s , c i t i z e n s and a s s o c i a t i o n s and a v a r i e t y of i n t e r e s t e d o r g a n i z a t i o n s . The Committee was empowered to r e p o r t to the House of Commons i t ' s f i n d i n g s and recommendations. The i n i t i a l Committee was composed of 24 members w i t h changes ta k i n g place as v a r i o u s members wished to question witnesses. The Committee c a l l e d a v a r i e t y of i n d i v i d u a l s and o r g a n i z a t i o n s as witnesses. These in c l u d e d : The Deputy M i n i s t e r of the Department and the Senior A s s i s t a n t Deputy M i n i s t e r , Jasper Residents A s s o c i a t i o n , N a t i o n a l and P r o v i n c i a l Parks A s s o c i a t i o n , Waterton Park Chamber of Commerce, Canadian W i l d l i f e Federation and the Canadian Audubon S o c i e t y . The b r i e f s presented covered n e a r l y a l l aspects of the 1964 p o l i c y and though most were i n agreement, i n some cases, a p l e a was made f o r strengthening the p o l i c y e s p e c i a l l y i n the general f i e l d of conservation. I n e a r l y December, 1966, the Committee t r a v e l l e d west and spent four days i n Calgary, Banff and Jasper hearing b r i e f s presented on be-h a l f of v a r i o u s c o u n c i l s , boards, o r g a n i z a t i o n s , a s s o c i a t i o n s , c l u b s , and p r i v a t e c i t i z e n s f o r a t o t a l of 35 witnesses. A f u r t h e r 25 other statements were l a t e r t a b l e d before the Committee as w r i t t e n b r i e f s . The content of the b r i e f s v a r i e d g r e a t l y according to the p a r t i c u l a r o r g a n i z a t i o n or i n d i v i d u a l concerned. The most important statement to these Committee hearings came i n February of 1967 when the Senior A s s i s t a n t Deputy M i n i s t e r presented the Department's p o s i t i o n i n l i g h t of the r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s by witnesses during the previous year. The statement served to e l u c i d a t e and strengthen the p o s i t i o n taken by the Departmental P o l i c y statement made i n 1964. The p a r t i c u l a r areas which were covered i n the Department's paper i n c l u d e d : 26 N a t i o n a l Parks purpose, planning and development, land tenure system, a d m i n i s t r a t i o n problems i n N a t i o n a l Parks, N a t i o n a l Park goa l s . The Standing Committee presented i t s s i x t h report to the House of Commons on March 21st, 1967 covering a v a r i e t y of t o p i c s r e l a t i n g d i r e c t l y to N a t i o n a l Parks. The Committee supported the p r i n c i p l e of p o l i c y as set f o r t h i n S e c t i o n 4 of the N a t i o n a l Parks A c t . I t a l s o favoured the concept of zoning N a t i o n a l Parks i n t o three b a s i c areas -w i l d e r n e s s , semi-wilderness and v i s i t o r s e r v i c e s centres. The Committee a l s o agreed w i t h long-range planning of the parks and the d e c e n t r a l i z a -t i o n of a u t h o r i t y through r e g i o n a l o f f i c e s . The need f o r r e c r e a t i o n a l areas near urban centres was a l s o recognized, as was the need f o r co-operation w i t h p r o v i n c i a l and l o c a l a u t h o r i t i e s to r e d i r e c t d e t r i m e n t a l pressures which are placed on N a t i o n a l Parks. The problem of leases had c o n t i n u a l l y been brought to the a t t e n t i o n of the Committee during the previous year by many spokesmen and the problems were recognized i n the s i x t h r e p o r t . P a r t i c u l a r l y the matter of communication between the town r e s i d e n t s and the Department was obvious and changes recommended a c c o r d i n g l y . I t was a l s o deemed d e s i r a b l e to t e s t the v a l i d i t y of not renewing per p e t u a l renewable leases i n the court. The court r u l e d that the p e r p e t u a l renewable 36 leases would have to be honoured by the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . The growing need f o r r e c r e a t i o n a l f a c i l i t i e s i n the n a t i o n was i d e n t i f i e d w i t h the recommendation f o r the F e d e r a l Government to co-36 Canada, Supreme Court Reports. Judgement on Appeal from the Ex-chequer Court of Canada, Her Majesty the Queen v. W i l f r e d Alan Walker and Her Majesty the Queen v. M. E. C l a r k and Son L t d . , 1970, p. 649-679. 27 ordinate the development of r e c r e a t i o n areas. The purpose c i t e d being to provide the o p p o r t u n i t i e s near urban centres i n view of the f a c t that pressures were being placed on N a t i o n a l Parks to provide f o r opportun-i t i e s which were contrary to t h e i r purpose. At the same time i t was recommended that the F e d e r a l Government proceed to e s t a b l i s h a d d i t i o n a l N a t i o n a l Parks. The Standing Committee on Indian A f f a i r s and Northern Development was r e e s t a b l i s h e d f o l l o w i n g the 1968 F e d e r a l general e l e c t i o n . In the p e r i o d 1968 to 1971 the Committee d i d not discuss park p o l i c y as i n previous Committees but r a t h e r concerned i t s e l f w i t h i n d i v i d u a l problems such as Wood B u f f a l o N a t i o n a l Park. The c l a i m of the A l b e r t a Government to the parklands was considered, a l s o the problems of Indian land claims and the need f o r a northern road. During 1971 the major area of the Committee's concern was B i l l C-187, An Act Respecting Minerals i n the Yukon T e r r i t o r y . The d e s i r a b i l i t y of e s t a b l i s h i n g a N a t i o n a l Park i n the Kluane r e g i o n was discussed i n l i g h t of B i l l C-187. The N a t i o n a l Parks P o l i c y i n the 1970's The r e l a t i v e importance of the N a t i o n a l Parks P o l i c y i n the 1970's can best be judged i n the l i g h t of two areas of concern which have emerged during recent years. Environmental problems have become popular as issues of concern f o r both the p u b l i c and the p o l i t i c i a n s . This p o i n t i s apparent from the numerous books, magazines and news-paper a r t i c l e s , t e l e v i s i o n and r a d i o programs and the conferences and symposia on environmental i s s u e s . At the same time, the whole r e c r e a t i o n p i c t u r e i s changing r e l a t i v e 28 to the r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of the v a r i o u s agencies i n v o l v e d . The Fe d e r a l Government i s i n v o l v e d i n the r e c r e a t i o n f i e l d e i t h e r d i r e c t l y or i n d i r e c t l y through the work of a number of Departments. More concern i s being shown a l s o by a l l l e v e l s of governments w i t h attempts to c l a r i f y r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s to the p o i n t where a n a t i o n a l r e c r e a t i o n scheme or p l a n may emerge i n the f u t u r e . In the l i g h t of these p a r t i c u l a r concerns, N a t i o n a l Parks admini-s t r a t o r s must assess t h e i r present and f u t u r e d i r e c t i o n s of r e s p o n s i b i l -i t y to the Canadian p u b l i c . A s t a r t i n t h i s assessment process was begun w i t h the N a t i o n a l Park p u b l i c hearings program i n 1970. The hearings were h e l d to r e c e i v e the p u b l i c ' s view on the p r o v i s i o n a l master plans f o r nine of the e x i s t i n g parks. The hearings r e f l e c t e d the p u b l i c ' s concern on environmental and r e c r e a t i o n a l i s s u e s — the p r e s e r v a t i o n and use of N a t i o n a l Park lands. At each of these hearings, is s u e s and p o i n t s were r a i s e d which do not s p e c i f i c a l l y r e l a t e to the park i n question. Rather, they were p r o p e r l y a matter of p o l i c y and of concern to a l l the parks i n the system. Concern was focussed on those same p o l i c y areas which were evident i n the preceeding h i s t o r i c a l review and which remain today as ba s i c to the planner's task of preparing plans which r e f l e c t the man-date of the N a t i o n a l Parks Act. These p o l i c y areas are park i n t e g r i t y , park zoning, park access, land-based r e c r e a t i o n , water-based r e c r e a t i o n , urban s t y l e r e c r e a t i o n and park townsites. The piecemeal approach to p o l i c y i n the seventy-nine years p r i o r to 1964 has r e s u l t e d i n a docu-ment which attempts to r a t i o n a l i z e or r e c t i f y past p o l i c i e s and a l s o provide a c l e a r statement of f u t u r e courses of a c t i o n . The conti n u i n g i n t e r e s t of Members of Parliament i n park planning and development can be expected to increase as v a r i o u s environmental and r e c r e a t i o n land issues p r o l i f e r a t e . 30 CHAPTER 2 STUDY SCOPE 1. Conceptual Design The concept i n v o l v e d i n t h i s study i s that c e r t a i n f a c t o r s are important i n the park planning process; namely, the seven p o l i c y areas which were noted i n the preceeding chapter. I t i s assumed that the planner views these areas as being autonomous and d i s c r e t e , thereby p r o v i d i n g a d e f i n i t i v e b a s i s f o r making planning d e c i s i o n s r e l a t i v e to land-use a l l o c a t i o n s . The question a r i s e s whether these seven p o l i c y areas are important to the p o l i t i c i a n i n h i s understanding of the N a t i o n a l Parks P o l i c y i n i t s r e l a t i o n s h i p to park planning and development. A second question i s whether the p o l i t i c i a n views these p o l i c y areas as being autonomous or rath e r c o n s i d e r i n g the v a r i e t y of concepts i n v o l v e d i n each, are these areas too fragmented to be considered autonomous. The s t r a t e g y proposed to examine these concerns was to prepare a ques t i o n n a i r e which contained those questions the planner considers c r i t i c a l to reaching an understanding of the seven p o l i c y areas. The types of questions i n each p o l i c y area are shown i n Table I I . Table I I . P o l i c y Areas and Questions P o l i c y Areas Areas of Questioning 1. Park I n t e g r i t y - a c c e p t a b i l i t y of logging - r o l e of f o r e s t f i r e s 31 Table I I . P o l i c y Areas and Questions (continued) P o l i c y Areas 2. Park Zoning 3. Park Access Areas of Questioning - a c c e p t a b i l i t y of mining - impairment caused by h y d r o - e l e c t r i c power dams - r o t a t i o n of campgrounds - importance of sewage treatment p l a n t s - importance of simple designations - d e s i r a b i l i t y of l e g i s l a t i n g boundaries - l e v e l s of use w i t h i n v a r i o u s zones - n e c e s s i t y of a r t e r i a l access to parks - importance of minimizing impairment - l e v e l of road access - a c c e p t a b i l i t y of a i r p o r t s i n parks - a c c e p t a b i l i t y of t r a n s p o r t a t i o n c o r r i d o r s - p u b l i c use of f i r e access roads - freeway development i n parks 4. Land-based R e c r e a t i o n - motorized versus non-motorized 5. Water-based Recreation - motorized versus non-motorized 6. Urban-Style Recreation - a c c e p t a b i l i t y of man-made sports f a c i l i t i e s 7. Park Townsites - phasing out of e x i s t i n g townsites - importance of high standards f o r c o n s t r u c t i o n and maintenance - d e s i r a b i l i t y of harmonious a r c h i t e c t u r e - townsite autonomy In t h i s manner, i t i s p o s s i b l e to prepare a s c a l e , based on the questions asked, f o r each p o l i c y area which would d e f i n e the r e l a t i v e p o s i t i o n of the p o l i t i c i a n s who p a r t i c i p a t e d i n the study. The assumption was made that planners would give a w e l l - d e f i n e d s e t of answers to these same c r i t i c a l questions and could be sc a l e d a c c o r d i n g l y . This would r e s u l t i n those i n favour of park i n t e g r i t y , f o r example, 32 having a p o s i t i v e score and those opposed would have a negative score. I t was recognized that c e r t a i n personal c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and other r e l a t e d f a c t o r s may be important i n understanding how a person responds on the s c a l e . A socio-economic s e c t i o n , t h e r e f o r e , was in c l u d e d i n the questionn-a i r e . The f o l l o w i n g f a c t o r s were considered to i n f l u e n c e a respondents' answers: - Age - Income - Previous Occupation - Education - P l a c e of Childhood - Number of Years as a Member of Parliament - P o l i t i c a l P a r t y - Province - Type of Constituency - Last V i s i t to a N a t i o n a l Park - Distance to the Nearest N a t i o n a l Park - Park Age, i f there i s a N a t i o n a l Park i n the Constituency - Percentage of land area of Constituency i n N a t i o n a l Park Status 2. Scale D e f i n i t i o n The s e r i e s of questions presented i n Table 2 were considered e s s e n t i a l s i n c e each of the seven p o l i c y areas r e s u l t e d from a s e r i e s of secondary p o l i c y statements or questions. For example, the p o l i c y on park access can only be stat e d i n terms of a group of s p e c i f i c p o l i c y statements, such as those r e l a t i n g to a i r c r a f t , r a i l w a y s , h i g h -33 ways, et c e t e r a which i n combination form a p o l i c y area. When reviewed i n the h i s t o r i c a l context of N a t i o n a l Parks and i n the context of the p r o f e s s i o n a l planner's r o l e , such questions are c r i t i c a l to p o l i c y development. The change i n purpose of N a t i o n a l Parks from the " d o c t r i n e of us e f u l n e s s " i n the e a r l y 1900's to the land p r e s e r v a t i o n r o l e of today has r e s u l t e d i n a change i n what the p u b l i c , planners and p o l i t i c i a n s view as being acceptable land uses. This can be seen i n the present o p p o s i t i o n i n some quarters to f u r t h e r development w i t h i n parks, when the emphasis i s on ac h i e v i n g a balance i n the p r e -s e r v a t i o n and use w h i l e l e a v i n g lands i n an unimpaired s t a t e as req u i r e d by the N a t i o n a l Parks A c t . The park planner's r o l e i s to ensure that land-use a l l o c a t i o n i s undertaken i n such a way as to ensure a minimum of impairment. This can only be achieved by r e c o g n i z i n g the fundamental importance of those questions which r e l a t e to the seven p o l i c y areas. The f a c t that the N a t i o n a l Park's p o l i c i e s have been w r i t t e n down and put together i n one document i s a major step to p r o v i d i n g c o n t i n u i t y i n the planner's approach to parks i n a l l regions of the country. The c a p a b i l i t y of preparing a s c a l e and subsequently being able to de f i n e the p o s i t i o n of each respondant r e l a t i v e to the p o l i c y areas was based on the assumption that a c e r t a i n p a t t e r n of responses to a c o l l e c t i o n of questions does i n f a c t d e f i n e an autonomous p o l i c y area. The v a l i d i t y of the s c a l e and the respondents score depends on the v a l i d i t y of the questions posed. I t was assumed that those s p e c i f i c questions i n the que s t i o n n a i r e on N a t i o n a l Parks P o l i c y are v a l i d and do def i n e the r e l e v a n t p o l i c y areas i n which they are l o c a t e d . 34 3. Socio-economic Data I t has been acknowledged p r e v i o u s l y t h a t p o l i t i c i a n s and planners might p o s s i b l y view p o l i c y i s s u e s d i f f e r e n t l y . The reasons f o r such d i f f e r e n c e s might be r e l a t e d to socio-economic, p o l i t i c a l or park f a c t o r s . A f a c t o r such as p a r t y a f f i l i a t i o n could be of great importance c o n s i d e r i n g d i f f e r e n c e s i n the a t t i t u d e s towards n a t u r a l resources be-tween p o l i t i c a l p a r t i e s . Age, education and previous occupation can be seen to have an i n f l u e n c e on the understanding of environmental i s s u e s . F u r t h e r , f o r those p o l i t i c i a n s who have a n a t i o n a l park i n t h e i r con-s t i t u e n c y or who have vacationed there such f a c t o r s as time of l a s t v i s i t , park age, d i s t a n c e to the park and percentage of t h e i r c o n s t i t -uency i n n a t i o n a l parks could be i n f l u e n t i a l . For these reasons, i t i s important t o consider such f a c t o r s and to u t i l i z e some form of a n a l y s i s which i n d i c a t e how the p o l i t i c i a n w i l l respond to p o l i c y questions i n terms of v a r i o u s socio-economic, p o l i t i c a l and park data. 35 CHAPTER 3  SAMPLING 1. P a r t i c i p a t i o n Questionnaire I t was necessary f i r s t to determine the f e a s i b i l i t y of the study. This was important s i n c e the area of i n t e r e s t had not been s t u d i e d be-f o r e . I t was decided, t h e r e f o r e , to develop a simple q u e s t i o n n a i r e e x p l a i n i n g the purpose of the study and asking the Members to i n d i c a t e t h e i r w i l l i n g n e s s to p a r t i c i p a t e . The q u e s t i o n n a i r e was mailed to each of the 263 Members of Parliament. A t o t a l of 165 or 62.5% responded to the q u e s t i o n n a i r e . Those i n d i c a t i n g t h e i r w i l l i n g n e s s to a s s i s t i n the study by completing a second questionnaire on the N a t i o n a l Parks P o l i c y t o t a l l e d 78 or 29.5%. T h i r t y Members (11.4%) i n d i c a t e d that they would not commit themselves before reading the q u e s t i o n n a i r e . Based on the response of these two groups, i t was decided that a study could be undertaken. 2. Study Questionnnaire The second qu e s t i o n n a i r e was mailed to those Members of Parliament i n the "yes" and " i n d e f i n i t e " groups. The questionnaire was a l s o mailed to the n i n e t y - e i g h t members who d i d not respond to the f i r s t q u e s t i o n n a i r e . (See Appendix A.) The prosp e c t i v e respondents were contacted on three occasions over a p e r i o d of one year. Each time, a copy of the questionn-a i r e was enclosed i n order to s t i m u l a t e a response. The q u e s t i o n n a i r e was constructed from f i v e major s e c t i o n s of the N a t i o n a l Parks P o l i c y . The questions i n each s e c t i o n were constructed 36 p o l i c y statements, known problem areas, and from a r e p o r t on N a t i o n a l 37 Parks i n the United S t a t e s . The q u e s t i o n n a i r e was organized i n t o s i x s e c t i o n s d e a l i n g w i t h p o l i c y matters plus one other on socio-economic i n f o r m a t i o n p e r t a i n i n g 38 to the respondents. I t was recognized that the q u e s t i o n n a i r e was l o n g , but t h i s was necessary i f s u f f i c i e n t data was to be a v a i l a b l e . The only p r a c t i c a l means of s o l i c i t i n g responses was through a mail-back q u e s t i o n n a i r e s i n c e there was no opportunity to undertake i n d i v i d u a l i n t e r v i e w s . There are a number of obvious disadvantes r e l a t e d to the mail-back s i t u a t i o n . The most obvious i s the need to keep the questions simple so as to e l i m i n a t e personal i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s . This problem was encountered i n the study where i t was necessary to c a p s u l i z e v a r i o u s paragraphs or statements of p o l i c y f o r i n c l u s i o n i n the q u e s t i o n n a i r e . A number of Members of Parliament i n d i c a t e d that time and l a c k of knowledge of the subject prevented them from p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n the study. They pointed out that they are o f t e n c a l l e d upon to answer q u e s t i o n -n a i r e s on a wide range of subjects and as a consequence, only a s e l e c t e d few could be answered. One f i n a l problem encountered r e l a t i v e to the q u e s t i o n n a i r e was i n The C h r i s t i a n Science P u b l i s h i n g S o c i e t y . " W i l l Success S p o i l the N a t i o n a l Parks?" A C h r i s t i a n Science Monitor r e p r i n t , 1968, pgs. 46-53. One a d d i t i o n a l area of i n t e r e s t - education and a general S e c t i o n were in c l u d e d i n the q u e s t i o n n a i r e . The education f a c t o r was not able to be analyzed due to a poor response. The general S e c t i o n d i d generate a good response, however i t was decided to concentrate on the p a r t i c u l a r problem under review i n t h i s study. 37 the t r a n s l a t i o n i n t o French. The p o l i c y document was a v a i l a b l e only i n E n g l i s h , and consequently, meanings and i n t e n t of p o l i c y statements were p a r t i c u l a r l y d i f f i c u l t f o r the t r a n s l a t o r to capture. 3. Levels of Response The i n i t i a l m a i l i n g was to the 206 Members of Parliament who responded e i t h e r "yes" or " i n d e f i n i t e " or who d i d not respond to the p a r t i c i p a t i o n q u e s t i o n n a i r e . F i f t y - t w o completed q u e s t i o n n a i r e s were returned. This represented 25.2% of the t o t a l q uestionnaires mailed. The f i r s t follow-up l e t t e r and q u e s t i o n n a i r e was sent three months l a t e r and generated a r e t u r n of twenty questionnaires or 34.9%. The second follow-up l e t t e r and q u e s t i o n n a i r e was sent e i g h t months a f t e r the f i r s t and a f u r t h e r f i f t e e n q u e s tionnaires were returned complete. The t o t a l was eighty-seven questionnaires completed. This represents a 42.2% r a t e of r e t u r n based on the number of Members of Parliament sampled and 33.1% of the t o t a l number of Members. The t o t a l Members of Parliament was set at 263, due to a one seat vacancy. 4. Test f o r Representative Sample The chi-square t e s t was used to determine whether the respondents were r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of the u n i v e r s e . T e s t i n g was c a r r i e d out on the b a s i s of the socio-economic, p o l i t i c a l and park f a c t o r s discussed i n the 39 previous chapter. The r e s u l t s are shown below. In the case of income, pl a c e of childhood and l a s t v i s i t to a n a t i o n a l park i t was not p o s s i b l e to o b t a i n comparable data f o r a l l Members of Parliament, consequently chi-square a n a l y s i s could not be undertaken f o r these three a t t r i b u t e s . 38 Table I I I . Representation by Age Age i n Years Sample A c t u a l 21-30 1 5 31-40 17 45 41-50 36 102 51-60 21 76 61-70 7 31 > 70 0 4 No response 5 2 Observed X„ = 27. 41 w i t h 6 degrees of freedom. x 2 = 15. 03 at .05 l e v e l . 40 Table IV. Representation by Previous Occupation Occupation Sample A c t u a l Lawyer 20 72 P r i v a t e Business 10 43 Engineer 5 7 A g r i c u l t u r e 7 22 Business Management 18 60 Educator 8 26 Medicine 1 9 B l u e - c o l l a r 2 8 Clergy 0 4 M i l i t a r y 0 1 J o u r n a l i s t 0 7 Unions 0 4 No response 16 0 Observed X~ = 267.94 w i t h 12 degrees of freedom. X = 21.03 at .05 l e v e l . B i o g r a p h i c a l i n f o r m a t i o n on the Members of Parliament was a v a i l a b l e from the r e f e r e n c e , Canada's 28th Parliament, A Guide to the Members, t h e i r C o n s t i t u e n c i e s and t h e i r Government. Table V. Representation by Education Education L e v e l Sample A c t u a l P u b l i c School High School U n i v e r s i t y Post Graduate 2 21 22 34 4 67 97 95 No response 8 0 2 Observed X =67.79 w i t h 4 degrees of » freedom. X = 9.49 at .05 l e v e l . Table VI. Representation by Number of Years as a Member of Parliament Number of Years ' Sample A c t u a l 1- 3 4- 6 7-15 > 16 33 18 26 7 98 47 101 17 No response 3 0 Observed X„ = 11.38 w i t h 4 degrees of freedom. X = 9.49 at .05 l e v e l . 40 Table V I I . Representation by P o l i t i c a l P a r t y P a r t y Sample A c t u a l L i b e r a l 39 154 Pro g r e s s i v e Conservative 30 72 New Democratic 11 22 Ralliement C r e d i t i s t e 7 14 Independent 0 1 Observed X„ = 7.84 w i t h 4 degrees of freedom. X = 9.49 at .05 l e v e l . Table V I I I . Representation by Province Province Sample A c t u a l The T e r r i t o r i e s 2 2 B r i t i s h Columbia 12 23 A l b e r t a 10 19 Saskatchewan 4 13 Manitoba 4 13 Ontario 23 88 Quebec 20 74 New Brunswick 3 10 Nova S c o t i a 4 11 P r i n c e Edward I s l a n d 3 4 Newfoundland 2 7 Observed X„ = 12.51 w i t h 10 degrees of freedom. X = 18.37 at .05 l e v e l . Table IX. Representation by Type of Constituency 41 Constituency Type Sample A c t u a l Urban 28 100 Ru r a l 20 71 Both 37 92 No response 2 0 Observed X„ = 6.72 w i t h 3 degrees of freedom. X = 6.25 at .05 l e v e l . Table X. Representation by Distance to Nearest N a t i o n a l Park, Proposed N a t i o n a l Park* or N a t i o n a l Park Reserve** Distance i n M i l e s Sample A c t u a l 0- 50 21 50 51-100 23 84 101-150 32 102 151-200 9 15 201-250 1 6 251-300 1 3 5" 300 0 3 Observed X„ = 6.88 w i t h 6 degrees of freedom. X = 12.59 at .05 l e v e l . Proposed N a t i o n a l Park s t a t u s i n c l u d e s those areas which, i n 1970, were under a c t i v e c o n s i d e r a t i o n as a N a t i o n a l Park and which, by the time of w r i t i n g , had been so designated. N a t i o n a l Park Reserve s t a t u s i s used i n the case of the N a t i o n a l Park proposed f o r the East Arm Great Slave Lake area which became a Reserve i n 1971 and which w i l l terminate i n 1976. This s i t u a t i o n was d e s i r a b l e to minimize damage to the area pending the f i v e years given to the Indian Bands i n the re g i o n to study the concepts of N a t i o n a l Parks and the p a r t i c u l a r proposal i n t h e i r area. 42 Table X I . Representation by Park Age Date of Establishment Sample A c t u a l Z 1968 7 10 1921-1967 3 9 < 1920 4 5 Observed X„ = 1.59 w i t h 2 degrees of freedom X = 5.99 at .05 l e v e l . Table X I I . Representation by Percentage of Constituency as  N a t i o n a l Park. Percentage Sample A c t u a l <1% 4 7 l % - 5 % 7 11 v >5% 3 6 2 Observed X„ = 0.12 w i t h 2 degrees of freedom. X = 5.99 at .05 l e v e l . The sample was found not to be r e p r e s e n t a t i v e on the b a s i s of age, previous occupation, education, number of years as a Member of Parliament and type of constituency. This occurred where the observed 2 2 X values were l a r g e r than the t a b l e X at the .05 l e v e l . Representa-t i o n was i n d i c a t e d f o r p o l i t i c a l p a r t y , province represented, d i s t a n c e to nearest n a t i o n a l park, park age and percentage of constituency as a 2 N a t i o n a l Park, where the observed X values were sm a l l e r than the t a b l e value at the .05 l e v e l . A r e p r e s e n t a t i v e sample can not be claimed because of the s m a l l response r a t e (33%) and the number of non-representative cases based on socio-economic and p o l i t i c a l v a r i a b l e s . I t i s v a l i d to proceed w i t h the a n a l y s i s of the data d e s p i t e the l a c k of a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e sample. The a n a l y s i s w i l l s t i l l focus on the i d e a , that f o r those that d i d not respond, d i d they respond as hypo-th e s i z e d and does i t give an i n s i g h t i n t o how the p o l i t i c i a n s are viewing the v a r i o u s p o l i c y areas. The end r e s u l t w i l l be that any conclusions reached can not be claimed to be r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of a l l Members of Parliament. 44 CHAPTER 4  ANALYSIS OF THE DATA The number of i n d i v i d u a l v a r i a b l e s obtained from the q u e s t i o n n a i r e t o t a l l e d 135 from each of the respondents. In order to s i m p l i f y the a n a l y t i c procedures, the data were coded and subsequently punched onto computer cards. The i n f o r m a t i o n was then subjected to a number of computerized a n a l y t i c a l procedures. These c o n s i s t e d of f a c t o r a n a l y s i s and AID. Factor A n a l y s i s I t has been proposed p r e v i o u s l y that there are seven p o l i c y areas of importance to the park planner and the object of a n a l y s i s i s not to determine i f these are autonomous or orthogonal dimensions. Rather, the concern i s whether each one i s autonomous i n the sense that the questions that have been l i s t e d are answered i n a c o n s i s t e n t way so that one f a c t o r dominates the s t r u c t u r e of the seven areas and thereby forms a s c a l e . Factor a n a l y s i s of the answers to each set of questions, that i s seven f a c t o r a n a l y s i s , i s an appropriate way to determine i f one f a c t o r dominates the s t r u c t u r e of each of the seven areas and thereby has a dominant s c a l e or whether that i s not the case. The f a c t o r a n a l y s i s method, as used i n t h i s study, i n v o l v e s examining the c o r r e l a t i o n s between the v a r i a b l e s (or questions) i n each p o l i c y area and s e l e c t i n g those w i t h the highest degree of i n t e r -c o r r e l a t i o n w i t h each other. The groupings of the h i g h l y i n t e r -45 c o r r e l a t e d v a r i a b l e s are termed f a c t o r s . The f a c t o r a n a l y s i s procedure w i l l produce f i r s t l y an unrotated f a c t o r m a t r i x and subsequently a r o t a t e d f a c t o r m a t r i x . The unrotated f a c t o r matrix i s composed of columns and rows. The columns d e f i n e the f a c t o r s ; the rows r e f e r to the v a r i a b l e . In the i n t e r s e c t i o n of row and column i s given the l o a d i n g f o r the row v a r i a b l e on the column. The loadings measure which v a r i a b l e s are i n v o l v e d i n which f a c t o r p a t t e r n and to what degree. They can be i n t e r p r e t e d l i k e c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s . The f i r s t unrotated f a c t o r p a t t e r n d e l i n e a t e s the l a r g e s t p a t t e r n of r e l a t i o n s h i p i n the data; the second d e l i n e a t e s the next l a r g e s t p a t t e r n that i s u n c o r r e l a t e d w i t h the f i r s t . This p a t t e r n i s continued i n s uccessive f a c t o r s . The r o t a t e d f a c t o r m a t r i x attempts to maximize the number of loadings or c o r r e l a t i o n that r e f l e c t high v a l u e s . This r e s u l t s i n the d e l i n e a t i o n of d i s t i n c t c l u s t e r s of r e l a t i o n s h i p s , i f such e x i s t , u n l i k e the unrotated f a c t o r m a t r i x , there i s no s i g n i f i c a n c e attached to f a c t o r order. The f a c t o r s do remain orthogonal and the patterns can be c h a r a c t e r i z e d by v i r t u e of t h e i r high value l o a d i n g s . Factor a n a l y s i s w i l l produce a f a c t o r score c o e f f i c i e n t m a t r i x from which a f a c t o r score m a t r i x can be prepared. The f a c t o r score m a t r i x gives a score f o r each case (or respondent) on each f a c t o r p a t t e r n . 41 Factor analyses were c a r r i e d out using the SPSS computer package The computer package used i n t h i s study i s taken from SPSS ( S t a t i s t i -c a l Package f o r the S o c i a l S c i e n c e s ) , by N. Nie, D. H. Bent and C. H. H u l l . 1970 McGraw-Hill, pgs. 208-244. 46 and the r e s u l t s are presented and discussed i n the f o l l o w i n g chapter. Though the SPSS system does not compute f a c t o r scores d i r e c t l y , i t does provide the appropriate m a t r i x to be used i n c a l c u l a t i n g f a c t o r scores. The f a c t o r score c o e f f i c i e n t m a t r i x was used w i t h a computer program w i t h the o r i g i n a l data to produce the f a c t o r scores which are the object of a n a l y s i s i n the second stage. The purpose of the study i s to determine whether the p o l i t i c i a n , l i k e the park planner, views each p o l i c y area i n such a way that one f a c t o r dominates the s t r u c t u r e . To provide f o r the p o s s i b i l i t y of t h i s not being the case; i t i s important to a l l o w f o r the d e r i v a t i o n of more than one f a c t o r and s c a l e . The allowable number of f a c t o r s was entered i n t o the computer program as a consequence of the number of v a r i a b l e s (or questions) i n each p o l i c y area. Automatic I n t e r a c t i o n Detector Technique (AID) The independent v a r i a b l e s (socio-economic, p o l i t i c a l and park f a c t o r s ) may not enter i n t o decision-making i n a simple l i n e a r way, by e x p l a i n i n g peoples' responses to a l a r g e number of v a r i a b l e s . For t h i s reason, the use of the Michigan AID program i s suggested because i t o f f e r s an a n a l y s i s s t r a t e g y which permits an e x p l a n a t i o n of a given response i n terms of a number of v a r i a b l e s . I t w i l l produce a h i e r a r c h y which i n d i c a t e s which v a r i a b l e i s most important i n e x p l a i n i n g a given response, which v a r i a b l e i s second most important and so on. The AID technique, developed by Sonqiiist and Morgan, i s a m u l t i -v a r i a t e method of a n a l y s i s which has as i t s purpose the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of data i n t o homogeneous groups. Given a set of data on independent 47 v a r i a b l e s , the AID technique determines what v a r i a b l e s combine to produce the gr e a t e s t d i s c r i m i n a t i o n i n group means of the dependent v a r i a b l e . The t o t a l p o p u l a t i o n of independent observations i s d i v i d e d through a sequence of bin a r y s p l i t s i n mutually e x c l u s i v e t e r m i n a l subgroups. At each stage of the sequence, d i c h o t o m i z a t i o n occurs so as to provide the l a r g e s t r e d u c t i o n i n the unexplained sum of squares of the dependent v a r i a b l e . The group means that account f o r more of the t o t a l remaining sum of squares of the dependent v a r i a b l e than the means of any other p o s s i b l e combination of independent v a r i a b l e s i s chosen. In t h i s way, the mean values of the dependent v a r i a b l e s w i l l be as d i f f e r e n t as p o s s i b l e between groups, but as equal as p o s s i b l e w i t h i n groups. The output of the a n a l y s i s i s termed a " t r e e diagram" which shows the subgroups formed at each i t e r a t i o n , along w i t h a s s o c i a t e d s t a t i s t i c s . The AID program used i n the study i s not the package s u p p l i e d by the U n i v e r s i t y of Michigan, but a v e r s i o n developed by the Government of Canada before the U n i v e r s i t y made the program a v a i l a b l e i n a F o r t r a n form. The r e s u l t s of AID a n a l y s i s are discussed i n the next Chapter. 48 CHAPTER 5  RESULTS 1. D e r i v a t i o n of Scores The seven p o l i c y areas were, i n t u r n , f a c t o r analyzed w i t h the r e s u l t that i n each case there was not a s i n g l e dominant f a c t o r . A t o t a l of twelve f a c t o r patterns were de r i v e d from the r o t a t e d f a c t o r m atrices. Each was designated by a t i t l e . F a c t o r scores were developed f o r each of the respondents by the twelve f a c t o r p a t t e r n s . P o l i c y Area 1. (Park I n t e g r i t y ) Table X L I I . D e r i v a t i o n of Dependent V a r i a b l e s (Park I n t e g r i t y ) ROTATED FACTOR MATRIX 4 2 V a r i a b l e s I I I I I I 1. N a t u r a l Forest * * ft 2. Forest F i r e s * * * 3. Non-commercial Forest Operations -0.563 * ft 4. Timber Berths Acceptable 0.705 * * 5. Purchase Timber Berths * * 0.597 6. Harvest Prime Timber 0.605 * * 7. Commercial Logging 0.471 * * 8. Forest Management * * * 9. Remove M i n e r a l Claims * -0.954 * 10. Mining Acceptable 0.721 * * 11. Underground Mining Acceptable * 0.410 * 12. Hydro Dams Acceptable 0.526 0.321 ft 13. Campground R o t a t i o n ft * ft 14. Construct Sewage Treatment P l a n t s * * 0.410 A l l l o a d i n g s below + 0.300 are s t a t i s t i c a l l y i n s i g n i f i c a n t 49 The high f a c t o r loadings i n Factor I are a l l r e l a t e d to those v a r i a b l e s p e r t a i n i n g to the use or development of the park n a t u r a l resources. This was designated the "resource development" f a c t o r . Factor I I was r e l a t e d to inconspicuous resource development. This was designated "inconspicuous resource development." The negative f a c t o r loading f o r non-commercial f o r e s t operations i n Factor I i n d i c a t e s o p p o s i t i o n t o t h i s type of a c t i v i t y w i t h i n the framework of resource e x p l o i t a t i o n . No s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t f a c t o r loadings were developed f o r the f o l l o w i n g v a r i a b l e s : maintenance of a n a t u r a l f o r e s t , f o r e s t f i r e s viewed as pa r t of the n a t u r a l ecosystem, f o r e s t management compatible w i t h the use of an area and r o t a t i o n of campgrounds to avoid impairment and over use. P o l i c y Area 2. (Park Zoning) Table XIV. D e r i v a t i o n of Dependent V a r i a b l e s (Park Zoning) ROTATED FACTOR MATRIX V a r i a b l e s F a c t o r I Loadings I I 1. S i m p l i f i e d Zoning * * 2. Zoning Excludes Uses ft 0.333 3. Zoning Concentrates Uses * 0.664 4. L e g i s l a t e Zones 0.362 * 5. Wilderness - L i m i t R e c r e a t i o n 0.481 * 6. Wilderness - No permanent developments * 0.317 7. Wilderness - More development 0.642 ft 8. Zone S u b d i v i s i o n s 0.510 0.401 The f a c t o r s i n t h i s p o l i c y area were r e j e c t e d because they d i d not produce any evident p a t t e r n s of l i n k a g e between the v a r i a b l e s . 50 P o l i c y Area 3. (Park Access) Table XV. D e r i v a t i o n of Dependent V a r i a b l e s (Park Access) ROTATED FACTOR MATRIX V a r i a b l e s I Factor Loadings I I I I I 1. A r t e r i a l Highways Outside Park 0.650 * * 2. S u f f i c i e n t Road Access 0.331 * * 3. Good Standards 0.904 * * 4. Minimize Impairments 0.812 * * 5. Zone C o m p a t i b i l i t y 0.733 * 0.349 6. No Commercial A i r p o r t s 0.503 * 0.598 6a. High Cost of A i r p o r t s * 0.622 6b. Precedence * * 0.550 6c. Noise P o l l u t i o n 0.417 -0.317 0.516 6d. Management Problems * * 0.630 7. T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C o r r i d o r s 0.386 * * 8. More T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Systems * 0.605 * 9. Develop Freeways * 0.787 * 10. Develop A i r p o r t s A 0.786 * 11. P r i v a t e A i r c r a f t * 0.706 * 12. Open F i r e Access Roads * 0.709 A A l l three f a c t o r s were v i a b l e . F a c t o r I r e l a t e s to t r a n s p o r t a t i o n development w i t h minimum impairment. Factor I I r e l a t e s to maximum development of high speed t r a n s p o r t a t i o n , and Factor I I I r e l a t e s to non-a i r p o r t development. The three f a c t o r s were designed as " t r a n s p o r t a t i o n improvements w i t h minimum impairment," "high speed t r a n s p o r t a t i o n " and "no a i r p o r t s development." P o l i c y Area 4. (Land-Based Recreation) Table XVI. D e r i v a t i o n of Dependent V a r i a b l e s (Land-Based Recreation) ROTATED FACTOR MATRIX V a r i a b l e s I F a c t o r Loadings I I I I I 1. Camping 0,. 536 A * 51 Table XVI. D e r i v a t i o n of Dependent V a r i a b l e s (Land-Based Recreation) -Continued ROTATED FACTOR MATRIX Factor Loadings V a r i a b l e s I I I I I I 2. D r i v i n g f o r Pleasure * A A 3. Dune Buggy Racing * 0.501 A 4. H i k i n g 0.783 A A 5. Hunt i n g A A A 6. Mountain Climbing 0.688 A A 7. Horseback R i d i n g 0.694 A A 8. Rock C o l l e c t i n g A A 0.525 9. Scenic Viewing 0.769 A A 10. Snowmobiling A 0.728 A 11. S k i i n g 0.319 A 0.357 Factor I i n d i c a t e s a strong tendency to chose r e c r e a t i o n a l uses which have t r a d i t i o n a l l y been part of the N a t i o n a l Parks. This f a c t o r was given the t i t l e " T r a d i t i o n a l R e c r e a t i o n . " Factor I I was r e l a t e d to a l l t e r r a i n v e h i c l e s . Factor I I I was not r e t a i n e d since l i n k a g e was not evident. Factor I I was designated as " a l l - t e r r a i n v e h i c l e s . " No s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t f a c t o r loadings were developed f o r the v a r i a b l e s d r i v i n g f o r pleasure and hunting. P o l i c y Area 5. (Water-Based Recreation) Table XVII. D e r i v a t i o n of Dependent V a r i a b l e s (Water-Based Recreation) ROTATED FACTOR MATRIX Factor Loadings V a r i a b l e s I I I 1. Canoeing A 0.915 2. F i s h i n g A 0.472 3. Power Boating 0.613 A 4. S a i l i n g 0.320 A 5. Wate r s k i i n g 1.065 A 6. Swimming A 0.473 52 The two f a c t o r s p o l a r i z e d the v a r i a b l e s i n t o two d i s t i n c t groups. Factor I was concerned w i t h the v a r i o u s fast-moving, high cost forms of water-based r e c r e a t i o n . Factor I I was concerned w i t h the slower moving, low cost r e c r e a t i o n uses. They were designed as "High-Fast R e c r e a t i o n " and "Low-Slow Recreation" r e s p e c t i v e l y . P o l i c y Area 6. (Urban-Style Recreation) The a n a l y s i s of the data i n t h i s p o l i c y area was not undertaken due t o the discov e r y of an e r r o r i n the French v e r s i o n of the question-n a i r e . B i l l i a r d s was omitted and there was no means of d i s t i n g u i s h i n g between the two types of bowling. P o l i c y Area 7. (Park Townsites) Table X V I I I . D e r i v a t i o n of Dependent V a r i a b l e s ROTATED FACTOR MATRIX - PARK TOWNSITES MATRIX Factor Loadings V a r i a b l e s I I I I l l 1. Phase-out Townsites 0.355 -0.456 * 2. L i m i t S e r v i c e s * 0.476 * 3. L i m i t Residents 0.999 * * 4. L i m i t Townsites * * ft 5. Harmonious A r c h i t e c t u r e * 0.562 ft 6. High Standards * 0.590 ft 7. E x t r a S e r v i c e s * * 0. 325 8. M u n i c i p a l Self-Government * * 0. 554 9. E q u i t a b l e Rentals * * 0. 547 10. V i s i t o r S e r v i c e s Only 0.412 * * Factor I r e l a t e s to phasing-out of townsites by l i m i t i n g r e s i d e n t s and s e r v i c e s . Factor I I r e l a t e s to r e t a i n i n g townsites and maintaining high standards. Factor I I I r e l a t e s to mu n i c i p a l self-government. Factor I was designated " l i m i t development," Factor I I was designated "high standards," Factor I I I was designated "autonomy." There was no s i g n i f i -53 cant l o a d i n g developed f o r the v a r i a b l e l i m i t i n g the number of park townsites to those p r e s e n t l y e x i s t i n g . The f a c t o r scores which were derived are shown i n Appendix B. The score can be i n t e r p r e t e d i n the same manner as on any s c a l e . Those respondents who have high p o s i t i v e scores on "resource development," f o r example, are i n favour of those a c t i v i t i e s which compose the f a c t o r p a t t e r n , namely commercial l o g g i n g , mining and hydro power developments. I t i s the f a c t o r scores which form the dependent v a r i a b l e s i n the AID a n a l y s i s . I d e n t i f i c a t i o n of C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s A s s o c i a t e d w i t h Scores. The AID technique was employed i n an attempt to f i n d those respondent c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s that were most c l o s e l y associated w i t h d i f f e r e n c e s i n scores on f a c t o r p a t t e r n s . The respondent c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and codes employed are given i n Table XIX. The r e s u l t s of the AID technique are given i n the twelve t r e e diagrams (Figures 1-12) which f o l l o w . The stopping r u l e used was such that when a s p l i t r e s u l t e d i n a sub-group w i t h fewer than eight cases, no f u r t h e r s p l i t s were allowed. This was d e s i r a b l e to provide a l e v e l of c r e d i b i l i t y to any f u r t h e r s p l i t s . The r e s u l t s can best be i n t e r p r e t e d by f o c u s s i n g a t t e n t i o n on those t e r m i n a l groups, which have p o s i t i v e means or scores and negative scores, and t r a n s l a t i n g coding f o r each i n t o n a r r a t i v e form. For each p o l i c y p a t t e r n i t was decided to g e n e r a l i z e the respondent's c h a r a c t e r -i s t i c s , i n e i t h e r p o s i t i v e or negative groups, by s e t t i n g a c u t - o f f v a l u e of + 0.250. 1. Resource Development The t r e e diagram f o r the AID a n a l y s i s of the scores f o r resource 54 development i s given as Figure 1. Figure 1 i s i n t e r p r e t e d as f o l l o w s . Group 1(1) i s the t o t a l p o p u l a t i o n of 87 respondants. The mean value of the dependent v a r i a b l e , the logarithms of the resource development scores, i s M i = 0.0003. A f t e r examining a l l p o s s i b l e primary s p l i t s f o r each independent v a r i -able, the maximum r e d u c t i o n i n the unexplained sum of squares i s obtained by s p l i t t i n g Group 1 on the b a s i s of income. A l l those members of Parliament w i t h t o t a l f a m i l y income during 1968 l e s s than $20,000 are i n Group 2 (n = 48). A l l those w i t h income gre a t e r than or equal to $20,000 are i n Group 3 (n = 39). The mean score f o r Group 2 i s M2 = -0.296; the mean score f o r Group 3 i s M3 = 0.365. A f t e r Step 1, the same procedure that was a p p l i e d to Group 1 i s a p p l i e d t o Groups 2 and 3. Then the procedure i s again a p p l i e d to the sub-groups formed at the end of Step 2 and so on. Table XLX. Respondent C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s Codes V a r i a b l e D e s c r i p t i o n Codes X 2 Age 0 1 2 3 4 5 No response 21-30 years 31-40 years 41-50 years 51-60 years 61-70 years X, 3 Income 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 No response < $10,000 $10,000 - $14,999 $15,000 - $19,999 $20,000 - $24,999 $25,000 - $29,999 $30,000 - $34,999 $35,000 - $39,999 ! £ $40,000 55 Table XIX. Respondent C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s Codes (Continued) V a r i a b l e D e s c r i p t i o n Codes X, Previous Occupation 0 = No response 1 = lawyer 2 = p r i v a t e business 3 = engineer 4 = a g r i c u l t u r e 5 = business management 6 = educator 7 = medicine 8 = b l u e - c o l l a r worker X c Education 1 = p u b l i c school 2 = high school 3 = u n i v e r s i t y 4 = post-graduate 5 = no response Place of Childhood 0 = No response 1 = m e t r o p o l i s (> 1 m i l l i o n ) 2 = l a r g e c i t y (250,000 to 1 m i l l i o n ) 3 = medium c i t y (50,000-250,000) 4 = small c i t y (10,000-50,000) 5 = town (1,000-10,000) 6 = v i l l a g e (< 1,000) 7 = farm Number of Years as Member of Parliament 0 = No response 1 = 1-3 years 2 = 4-6 years 3 = 7-15 years 4 = - 16 years X r P o l i t i c a l P a r t y 1 = L i b e r a l 2 = Pr o g r e s s i v e Conservative 3 = L i b e r a l Labour 4 = New Democratic 5 = Ralliement C r e d i t i s t e X, Province 1 = The T e r r i t o r i e s 2 = B r i t i s h Columbia 3 = A l b e r t a 4 = Saskatchewan 5 = Manitoba 56 Table XIX. Respondent C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s Codes (Continued) V a r i a b l e D e s c r i p t i o n Codes X, Province 6 = Ontario 7 = Quebec 8 = P r i n c e Edward I s l a n d 9 = New Brunswick 10 = Nova S c o t i a 11 = Newfoundland X 10 Constituency 0 = No response 1 = urban 2 = r u r a l 3 = both X 11 Last V i s i t to a N a t i o n a l Park 0 = No response 1 = < 1 year 2 = 1-3 years 3 = 4-6 years 4 = 7-9 years 5 = £10 years X 12 Dista n c e to nearest N a t i o n a l Park 1 = 0-50 m i l e s 2 = 51-100 m i l e s 3 = 101-150 mile s 4 = 151-200 m i l e s 5 = 201-250 m i l e s 6 = 251-300 m i l e s 7 = i 301 m i l e s X 13 Park Age 1 = 2 3 _ > 1968 date of e s t a b l i s h -ment 1921-1967 <1920 X 14 Percentage of Constituency as a N a t i o n a l Park 1 2 3 <1% 1-5% > 5% Tables XX and XXI show the C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the Members of Parliament r e l a t i v e t o resource development i n N a t i o n a l Parks. 58 Table XX. C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament f a v o u r i n g Resource  Development Number of Score Respondents I n f l u e n t i a l V a r i a b l e s ( i n order of importance) 0.895 19 1. Income — greater than $20,000/year 2. Province — B.C., O n t a r i o , Quebec, P.E.I., New Brunswick, Nova S c o t i a , Newfoundland. 3. Previous Occupation — p r i v a t e business, engineer, a g r i c u l t u r e , business management. Table XXI. C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament opposed to Resource  Development Number o f Score Respondents I n f l u e n t i a l V a r i a b l e s ( i n order of importance) -0.517 20 1. Income — l e s s than $20,000/year (or no response) 2. Province — B.C., Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Nova S c o t i a , P.E.I., New Bruns-wick, Newfoundland. -0.422 8 1. Income — greater than $20,000/year 2. Province — T e r r i t o r i e s , A l b e r t a , Saskatchewan, Mani tob a. -0.336 18 1. Income — l e s s than $20,000/year (or no response) 2. Province — T e r r i t o r i e s , A l b e r t a , O n t a r i o , Quebec. 3. P a r t y — L i b e r a l , New Democratic. 2. Inconspicuous Resource Development The AID technique t r e e diagram of the scores f o r inconspicuous resource development i s given as Figure 2. Tables XXII and X X I I I show the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament r e l a t i v e to inconspicuous resource development i n N a t i o n a l Parks. 59 Table X X I I . C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament f a v o u r i n g  Inconspicuous Resource Development Number of Score Respondents I n f l u e n t i a l V a r i a b l e s ( i n order of importance) 0.842 14 1. childhood — p o p u l a t i o n of l e s s than 10,000 2. previous occupation — a l l occupations except medicine 3. age — o l d e r than 50 years. 0.342 19 1. childhood — p o p u l a t i o n of l e s s than 10,000 2. previous occupation — a l l occupations except medicine 3. age — l e s s than 50 years. Table X X I I I . C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament opposed to  Inconspicuous Resource Development Score Number of Respondents I n f l u e n t i a l V a r i a b l e s ( i n order of importance) -0.930 11 1. childhood — po p u l a t i o n greater than 10,000 (a l s o no response) 2. previous occupation — p r i v a t e business, engineer, business management, educator 3. education — u n i v e r s i t y , no response. -0.503 8 1. childhood — p o p u l a t i o n greater than 10,000 ( a l s o no response) 2. previous occupation — lawyer, a g r i c u l t u r e , b l u e - c o l l a r 3. province — T e r r i t o r i e s , B.C., A l b e r t a , . Nova S c o t i a . -0.327 12 1. childhood — p o p u l a t i o n greater than 10,000 2. previous occupation — p r i v a t e business, engineer, business management, educator 3. education — high s c h o o l , u n i v e r s i t y . 60 1 i T 1 I j j j j | HP j 1 j | 1 r "jT" 3 L 9 -s A A d. du r ' a "> , F ,i — CM 1"-y, i v-l • u h H L 1 "TVC 1 J n _ r -l~ -H 1 Vn 1 •' _f— |,L r • > 1 ^ - V 7 ' r 1 » — J d LO c » i a 4-j * —• HP- I s —' 1 -^ N 1 H M II II n II fa k N h 1 CO X! fx n J j _T_ a r -"jr" P-rj U i u 1 1 h-l n (J u c < r — ? c d 6 <j c n H a c c <1 • i H JJ jd C *i n 4 J — K. K, -H K «J -#-V— H —1 tr P P a n o U Pi 2 u u T i i-H f\.i p- < p-t Pi y p -<! w o fx* i rTi W fy w i«1 H o 1 0 lo k. Jo —v> rt 1 o M L 2 . • H*>• - e -tn f i & r "Oi *•«» rn nH N CO —CU-•-> QJ i—i M *P Ml 1 1 h to ™> M —p-o r*i a i o <\ ••iH In <N P--CO- - B - ""I 0 — - « 0 - 3 •—i T 1 ' tl l — 0 JN ... -> in • •\ . 1 N < 0 d; -61 Table X X I I I . C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament opposed to  Inconspicuous Resource Development (Continued) Number of Score Respondents I n f l u e n t i a l V a r i a b l e s ( i n order of importance) -0.262 9 1. childhood — p o p u l a t i o n l e s s than 10,000 2. previous occupation — medicine, no response 3. T r a n s p o r t a t i o n w i t h Minimum Impairment The AID technique t r e e diagram of the scores r e l a t i v e to t r a n s p o r t a -t i o n w i t h minimum impairment i s given i n F i g u r e 3. Tables XXIV and XXV show the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament r e l a t i v e to t r a n s p o r t a -t i o n w i t h minimum impairment i n N a t i o n a l Parks. Table XXIV. C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament f a v o u r i n g  T r a n s p o r t a t i o n w i t h Minimum Impairment Score Number of Respondents I n f l u e n t i a l V a r i a b l e s ( i n order of importance) 0.616 19 3. 4, previous occupation — a l l except p r i v a t e business and a g r i -c u l t u r e Province — T e r r i t o r i e s , B.C., On t a r i o , Quebec, P.E.I., Nova S c o t i a , Newfoundland constituency — no response, r u r a l , urban age — o l d e r than 40. 0.424 1. previous occupation — same as 0.616 group 2. Province — same as 0.616 group 3. constituency — mixed 4. l a s t v i s i t to a N a t i o n a l Park — l e s s than one year. 63 Table XXV. C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament opposed to T r a n s p o r t a t i o n w i t h Minimum Impairment Score Number of Respondents I n f l u e n t i a l V a r i a b l e s ( i n order of importance) -0.481 17 previous occupation — p r i v a t e business and a g r i c u l t u r e . 4. Maximum T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Development The AID technique t r e e diagram of the scores f o r maximum transportatfon development i s given i n F i g u r e 4. Tables XXVI and XXVII show the c h a r a c t e r -i s t i c s of the Members of Parliament r e l a t i v e to maximum t r a n s p o r t a t i o n development i n N a t i o n a l Parks. Table XXVI. C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament f a v o u r i n g  Maximum T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Development Number of Score Respondents I n f l u e n t i a l V a r i a b l e s ( i n order of importance) 0.921 10 1. previous occupation — p r i v a t e business. 0.763 9 1. previous occupation — a l l groups except p r i v a t e business 2. Province — T e r r i t o r i e s , O n t a r i o , Quebec, New Brunswick 3. l a s t v i s i t to a N a t i o n a l Park — has v i s i t e d a N a t i o n a l Park 4. education — high s c h o o l . 0.303 10 1. previous occupation — same as 0.763 group 2. Province — same as 0.763 score group 3. l a s t v i s i t to a N a t i o n a l Park — same as 0.763 group 4. Province — T e r r i t o r i e s , Quebec, New Bruns-wick 64 1 1 j r 1 j r j 1 — V 1 r > n . 0 rr o it I —Jjs T u i • • I - I U i~ 1 c > <» I r p ir. i • o j J -t-H-"- H— T\ 1 • U^ —CNI -i, 1 n c HI p H c ri. CM vd in i L 5 ) -* Hi ^ - r Hi' xy -it - M — II I I 1 1 i< 11 H n —D— IT" >< f > i fx o -r-r-1 — 3 -•ri 5 " H crj .-j H q 4- r — ^ " c 0 u - — n n -M— Q . 3 l j c • r »1- -H SX J c u id 4J 1-1 •r i> cd s. — 1—1 jj] <- 4- C u -t — ^1 M S- fT r ~ 1 — CO 1— F CM | 3 a o H — -<l, H u - M -e •\ «-s> — 3—-...I o ( [ — i — J [ x| | CSJ [ tzj 1 ( o & L E — .cf i •0 i f c a) J •Si h =r->, - t 1T S a} -1 —c y =3 F 3 Y -d I n— * — s 3 - i c =j— Pi »l 4] s.^  "If —Si tt t^— VI V a 1 — I i—; cy- —i "3—-- — — _ T u p A Zj -Si- • t i c !> til •••> =j— VO — M — — — > ^ — s_r — rs •s* - if\ r — » < vi { —-V S> 0 —f-65 Table XXVII. C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament opposed  to Maximum T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Development Number of Score Respondents I n f l u e n t i a l V a r i a b l e s ( i n order of importance) -0.598 17 1. previous occupation — a l l groups except p r i v a t e business 2. Province — a l l Provinces except T e r r i t o r i e s O n t a r i o , Quebec, New Brunswick 3. education — post graduate, no response -0.374 8 1. previous occupation — same as -0.598 group 2. Province — T e r r i t o r i e s , O n t a r i o , Quebec, New Brunswick 3. l a s t v i s i t to a N a t i o n a l Park — has not v i s i t e d a N a t i o n a l Park 5. No A i r p o r t Development The AID technique tree diagram of the f a c t o r scores f o r no a i r p o r t development i s given i n F i g u r e 5. Tables XXVIII and XXIX show the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the Members of Parliament r e l a t i v e to a i r p o r t develop-ment i n N a t i o n a l Parks. Table XXVIII. C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament opposed  to A i r p o r t Development Number of Score Respondents I n f l u e n t i a l V a r i a b l e s ( i n order of importance) 0.633 18 1. Province — B.C., Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec, Nova S c o t i a 2. p a r t y — P r o g r e s s i v e Conservative, New Democratic 3. previous occupation — p r i v a t e b u s i n e s s , a g r i c u l t u r e , business management, educator, b l u e - c o l l a r . 67 Table XXVIII. C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament opposed  to A i r p o r t Development - Continued) Score Number of Respondents I n f l u e n t i a l V a r i a b l e s ( i n order of importance) 0.500 8 1. Province — same as .633 group 2. p a r t y — L i b e r a l , Ralliement C r e d i t i s t e 3. childhood — no response, p o p u l a t i o n greater than 1 m i l l i o n . TABLE XXIX. C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament f a v o u r i n g  A i r p o r t Development Number of Score Respondents I n f l u e n t i a l V a r i a b l e s ( i n order of importance) -0. 731 10 1. Province — T e r r i t o r i e s , A l b e r t a , P.E.I., Newfoundland, New Brunswick 2. constituency — r u r a l -0. 335 10 1. Province — same as -.731 group 2. constituency — urban, mixed, no response. -0. 330 16 1. Province — B.C., Saskatchewan, Manitoba, O n t a r i o , Quebec, Nova S c o t i a 2. p a r t y — L i b e r a l , R alliement C r e d i t i s t e 3. childhood — p o p u l a t i o n l e s s than 1 m i l l i o n 4. Province — B.C., Saskatchewan, Ontario 6. T r a d i t i o n a l Recreation The AID technique t r e e diagram of the scores f o r t r a d i t i o n a l r e c r e a t i o n i s given i n Figure 6. Tables XXX and XXXI show the cha r a c t e r -i s t i c s of the Members of Parliament r e l a t i v e t o t r a d i t i o n a l r e c r e a t i o n i n N a t i o n a l Parks. .6.8 "(" j 1 j | j J 1 J j I I n l LJ '1 V D r 1 1 "\ •> l i -o r i J I JU r H J 4 + H-»< 1 1 " •h z r H #1 1 • • CS c 5 O J-iU b • i n 4-j OS " i i [I rl, u it !* X 1 J 3 u 4 A -ft •<3 *r ) c/ 3 <i j -r x— _|J j 4-h H >- i • I y i* P. i—( r P o u mi c c •r o o 4- dJ , fc' H • K. T - ' f P fll . © . H H d H< Xf. i - F4* I-H J ! o V & -rv..— n i l r c s o 1 1 'O -tj)- & -r-ft— I fx o N in' "11 PJ c o -4J) -03 «N c O -OJ. -i-a-,( D ,... a "7 J, 1 IS * \ c i - c r 7 • n i I -rcl 1*1 H ) a e c5 • h 1 b -i i «-» v 1 o vj - s-1 «s 1 CN i, KJ i d 69 TABLE XXX. C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament f a v o u r i n g T r a d i t i o n a l R e c r e a t i o n Number of Score Respondents I n f l u e n t i a l V a r i a b l e s ( i n order of importance) 0.277 48 1. previous occupation — a l l except p r i v a t e business 2. income — a l l c a t e g o r i e s 3. previous occupation — lawyer, a g r i c u l t u r e , business management, educator, medicine. Table XXXI. C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament opposed to T r a d i t i o n a l R e c r e a t i o n Number of Score Respondents I n f l u e n t i a l V a r i a b l e s ( i n order of importance) -0.903 10 1. previous occupation — p r i v a t e business -0.390 10 1. previous occupation — a l l groups except p r i v a t e business 2. income — - no response. 7. A l l - T e r r a i n V e h i c l e s The AID technique t r e e diagram of the scores f o r a l l - t e r r a i n v e h i c l e s i s given i n Figure 7. Tables XXXII and XXXIII show the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament r e l a t i v e to a l l - t e r r a i n v e h i c l e s i n N a t i o n a l Parks. TABLE XXXII. C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament favouring A l l - T e r r a i n V e h i c l e Use Number of Score Respondents I n f l u e n t i a l V a r i a b l e s ( i n order of importance) 1.012 9 1. Province — Quebec, P.E.I. 2. previous occupation — p r i v a t e business, a g r i c u l t u r e , business management. 70 1 J—!l — i — — r - y i i I I — J 1—!-| I m 7 : nl 1 I 1 ip l 1^  J | 1 1 WeaJLj 1. I.J OQJ 1 1 1 1 H <ir 1 1 1 1 ir ~r—— M M " i ui | | | e S| |«| | I f . i f 1 ! Q 1 rS|c-4i | r c u 1 I—|—' •j i -H U-> i i * T k b l T\\ •k —1—pti n! • ?- 1' i - ^ •H 1 •ol A |r-N ; t i - 4 00 H LCkl 1 iri In 1 r C1 - j 1 L *—> V -J 111 ^ • 1 1 P 1  M M rl | ' t i l III II 11 -4* M •> j n 0 1 1 I xjl 1 1 *j X| 1 tic! I 1 1 id 1 j ~L jco 1 cu j "~|w-< I TH _|Q •P — T O -I — 1 0 -•'H 1 1 CO 1 1 H 1^  _JtZ —LbL. 1 1 1 • M 4 & 1 r li J m ( ©t Ml' O r 1 *~' •H 1 1 1 c J1 II 1 1 1 1 -1 +4 1 0 M E J I I I * " y r • 4J, 1 3 I l l s •rl > > > UJ <-i r H 1 0 N 11 1 p H [_i w ri • H M I R —im 1 tr> I 1 GL,l I I "Vi C 7 C 1 1 1 t-i irS F? Ft i 1 P rl b •< i —to rt H 1 i —Sv——— N es! «« rl n 1 M 1 1 1 1 lo I 1 1 4 0 t Ii <* Q CN t> Hi f) 1 -> O Cx) CO Si H f CO a) II L/j r\ 0 r> C • & W (~ h -n <» 1 »\. <C •v. mi r—• 1 »»» 1^  • o fY — i dl c 1 r -P-S° V I°I -< 1 t •j —* ( i t s \— 71 Table XXXII. C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament f a v o u r i n g  A l l - T e r r a i n V e h i c l e Use (Continued) Score Number of Respondents I n f l u e n t i a l V a r i a b l e s ( i n order of importance) 0.489 10 1. Province — a l l except Quebec and P.E.I. 2. previous occupation — p r i v a t e business, a g r i c u l t u r e , business management, educator, b l u e - c o l l a r 3. c o n s t i t u e n c y — urban, r u r a l 4. c h i l d h o o d — p o p u l a t i o n l e s s than 10,000. Table XXXIII. C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament opposed  to A l l - T e r r a i n V e h i c l e Use Number of Score Respondents I n f l u e n t i a l V a r i a b l e ( i n order of importance) -0.677 8 1. Province — a l l except Quebec and P.E.I. 2. previous occupation — no response, lawyer, engi neer, med i c i n e 3. income — greater than $25,000/year. -0.361 11 1. Province — a l l except Quebec and P.E.I. 2. previous occupation — p r i v a t e business, a g r i c u l t u r e , b u s i -ness management, educator, b l u e - c o l l a r worker 3. constituency — mixed. -0.315 22 1. Province — a l l except Quebec and P.E.I. 2. previous occupation — no response, lawyer, engineer, medicine 3. income — l e s s than $25,000/year i n c l u d i n g no response. 8. High Cost, Fast-Moving Water-Based Recr e a t i o n The AID technique t r e e diagram of the scores f o r high cost, f a s t -moving water-based r e c r e a t i o n i s given i n Fi g u r e 8. Tables XXXIV and XXXV show the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the Members of Parliament r e l a t i v e to high c o s t , fast-moving water-based r e c r e a t i o n i n N a t i o n a l Parks. Table XXXIV. C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the Members of Parliament f a v o u r i n g  High Cost, Fast-Moving Water-Based Recr e a t i o n Number of Score Respondents I n f l u e n t i a l V a r i a b l e s ( i n order of importance) 1.371 10 1. Province — M a n i t o b a , Quebec, Newfoundland 2. income — greater than $20,000/year. 0.547 11 1. Province — a l l except Manitoba, Quebec, Newfoundland 2. previous occupation — p r i v a t e business, a g r i c u l t u r e , business management, b l u e - c o l l a r worker 3. c o n s t i t u e n c y — r u r a l . 0.509 15 1. Province — Manitoba, Quebec, Newfoundland 2. income — no response, $10,000-$19,999/year, Table XXXV. C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the Members of Parliament opposed to  High-Cost, Fast-Moving, Water-Based R e c r e a t i o n Score Number of Respondents I n f l u e n t i a l V a r i a b l e s ( i n order of importance) -0.745 27 1. Province — a l l except Manitoba, Quebec, Newfoundland 2. previous occupation — no response, lawyer, engineer, educator, medicine 3. childhood — p o p u l a t i o n l e s s than 1 m i l l i o n . -0.308 15 1. Province — same as -0.745 group 2. previous occupation — p r i v a t e business, a g r i c u l t u r e , business management, b l u e -c o l l a r worker constituency — urban, mixed. 73 ) 74 9 . Low Cost, Slow-Moving, Water-Based R e c r e a t i o n The AID technique t r e e diagram of the scores f o r low-cost, slow-moving, water-based r e c r e a t i o n i s given i n F i g u r e 9. Tables XXXVI and XXXVII show the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the Members of Parliament r e l a t i v e to low-cost, slow-moving, water-based r e c r e a t i o n i n N a t i o n a l Parks. Table XXXVI. C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the Members of Parliament f a v o u r i n g  Low-Cost, Slow-Moving, Water-Based R e c r e a t i o n Number of Score Respondents I n f l u e n t i a l V a r i a b l e s ( i n order of importance) 0.257 45 1. pa r t y — L i b e r a l , P r o g r e s s i v e Conservative, Ralliement C r e d i t i s t e 2. income — greater than $10,000/year 3. Province — a l l except Manitoba and Quebec. Table XXXVII. C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament opposed  to Low-Cost, Slow-Moving Water-Based R e c r e a t i o n Number of Score Respondents I n f l u e n t i a l V a r i a b l e s ( i n order of importance) -0.714 11 1. p a r t y — New Democratic -0.369 10 1. pa r t y — L i b e r a l , P r o g r e s s i v e Conservative, Ralliement C r e d i t i s t e 2. income — no response. I t i s noted that the number of respondents i s the same as the sample s i z e f o r the New Democratic P a r t y Members of Parliament. Due to the v a r i -ance of scores, i t cannot be concluded that a l l these respondents had only negative scores. U-J 0 V t: r 0] 0 • r a ) T ,r — 5j vA c 0 3i 1 si 2 Sj 71 Li 1 7 I ioo n 1 — i !> R '1 ft 34 ,6 (< ) '•a 1£ 7a > Li u G 3-1 J c a s p i p P1 a n r t n c< t3 3D -t r-16 it c n p. %• H r ± a' r. :e s s xl X x P 8 3 h rt rt -( -( ( f i i "( ± fO2 -7 ± -1-n )• •> ) > r 0 ?" 5-3 & 6-» -€ )-L, n rl A y, 1 =-» o 5 4 3 u » pt 6-i "C V ~ a IA tl >: CL •p I a T" JD N :J tt E = F. a t: i D W T ; i c W A\ )\ I j " ] II c R FT :i TS G >"( :c R E -V J \ r ^ . i . i> >-76 10. Phasing Out Townsites by L i m i t i n g Development The AID technique t r e e diagram of the scores f o r phasing out town-s i t e s by l i m i t i n g development i s given i n Figure 10. Tables XXXVIII and XXXIX show the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament r e l a t i v e to phasing out townsites by l i m i t i n g developments i n N a t i o n a l Parks. Table XXXVIII. C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament f a v o u r i n g  Phasing-Out Townsites by L i m i t i n g Development Number of Score Respondents I n f l u e n t i a l V a r i a b l e s ( i n order of importance) 0.799 18 1. Province — T e r r i t o r i e s , Saskatchewan, Ont-a r i o , Quebec, P.E.I., Newfound-land 2. previous occupation — a g r i c u l t u r e , business management, medicine, b l u e - c o l l a r worker. 0.376 12 1. Province — same as 0.799 group 2. previous occupation — no response, p r i v a t e business, engineer, lawyer, educator 3. party — P r o g r e s s i v e Conservative, New Democratic, Ralliement C r e d i t i s t e . Table XXXIX. C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament Opposed  to Phasing Out Townsites by L i m i t i n g Development Number of Score Respondents I n f l u e n t i a l V a r i a b l e s ( i n order of importance) -0.945 9 1. Province — B. C , A l b e r t a , Manitoba, New Brunswick, Nova S c o t i a 2. income — no response, l e s s than $15,000/ year. -Bfaase mm,-Qut4Tewpfel-tfc4s SMS). 3BDE BeY-eibbmen-s mm roa D$2H2 7 ^ vzOA) TOGXJRE~mO' M P mm CITAS'S IFIG'AiT ION I-neemei chtldfhbib* iTREETHOkT^HasfenDUTrtrOWNSfTiT ma m. mm m EatEY ® LtHBTiINGlDlVMOrfffiNT (l2 -2) tt 78 Table XXXIX. C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament Opposed  to Phasing Out Townsites by L i m i t i n g Development (Continued) Number of Score Respondents I n f l u e n t i a l V a r i a b l e s ( i n order of importance) -0.560 14 1. Province — same as -0.945 group 2. income — greater than $15,000/year 3. childhood — p o p u l a t i o n l e s s than 50,000. -0.514 10 1. Province — T e r r i t o r i e s , Saskatchewan, Ontari o , Quebec, P. E. I . , Newfoundland 2. previous occupation — no response, lawyer, p r i v a t e business, engineer, educator 3. party — L i b e r a l 4. number of years as Member of Parliament — no response, 1-3 y e a r s . 11. R e t a i n Townsites and M a i n t a i n High Standards The AID technique t r e e diagram of the scores f o r r e t a i n i n g townsites and m a i n t a i n i n g high standards i s given i n F i g u r e 11. Tables XL and XLI show the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the Members of Parliament r e l a t i v e to r e t a i n i n g townsites and m a i n t a i n i n g high standards i n N a t i o n a l Parks. Table XL. C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament favouring  R e t a i n i n g Townsites and M a i n t a i n i n g High Standards Number of Score Respondents I n f l u e n t i a l V a r i a b l e s ( i n order of importance) 0.720 11 1. Province — a l l except T e r r i t o r i e s and Ontario 2. previous occupation — lawyer, p r i v a t e business, medicine, b l u e - c o l l a r worker 3. income — $10,000 - $19,999. 79 Table XL. C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament f a v o u r i n g  R e t a i n i n g Townsites and M a i n t a i n i n g High Standards  (Continued) Number of Score Respondents I n f l u e n t i a l V a r i a b l e s ( i n order of importance 0.382 10 1. Province — a l l except T e r r i t o r i e s and Ontario 2. previous occupation — same as 0.720 group 3. income — $20,000-$29,999, greater than $40,000. 0.329 11 1. Province — T e r r i t o r i e s and Ontario 2. previous occupation — engineer, a g r i c u l t u r e , business management, educator. 0.262 16 1. Province — a l l except T e r r i t o r i e s and Ontario 2. previous occupation — no response, engineer, a j r i c u l t u r e , business management, educator Table XLI. C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament opposed to  R e t a i n i n g Townsites and M a i n t a i n i n g High Standards Number of Score Respondents I n f l u e n t i a l V a r i a b l e s ( i n order of importance) -0.815 14 1. Province — T e r r i t o r i e s and O n t a r i o . 2. previous occupation — no response, lawyer, p r i v a t e business, b l u e - c o l l a r worker. -0.607 13 1. Province — a l l except T e r r i t o r i e s and Ontario 2. previous occupation — no response, engineer, a g r i c u l t u r e , business management, educator 3. childhood — p o p u l a t i o n l e s s than 10,000 4. education — u n i v e r s i t y , post-graduate, no response. 00 o 12. Townslte Autonomy The AID technique t r e e diagram of the scores f o r townsite autonomy i s given i n Figure 12. Tables X L I I and X L I I I show the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the Members of Parliament r e l a t i v e t o townsite autonomy i n N a t i o n a l Parks. Table X L I I . C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament  favouring Townsite Autonomy Number of Score Respondents I n f l u e n t i a l V a r i a b l e s ( i n order of importance) 0.587 9 1. previous occupation — p r i v a t e business, engineer, a g r i c u l t u r e , business management 2. income — greater than $30,000/year. 0.448 12 1. previous occupation — no response, lawyer, educator, medicine, b l u e - c o l l a r worker 2. P r o v i n c e — B.C., A l b e r t a , Manitoba, New Brunswick, Nova S c o t i a 3. constituency — no response, mixed. 0.419 11 1. previous occupation — p r i v a t e business, engineer, a g r i c u l t u r e , business management 2. income --.no response, $10,000-$29,999 3. age — older than 50 years. 82 | j I i 1 I j /• —« j — w r & — ^ « Pn— _ '•TV —jbi # 3 r _ i d 1 N i : H «*• t 1 ok H i> *»J 1 1 '"' '"L pt* i -p - -p **S —13G H —4 *-* t > —to —«t-— s - » •pi \C CN ] •Jvt L n — r —i a Jct-J_ 1*+-! H CO.. | 4-1 V > <. *~ > T v 4 | • tl J | —-H . . i II 1 II II I  II i I *3 >- j *T"1 p f ( i T l M T l h i= GO j* i xi "4 > j I -c Q-c — f -e V. -( J 0--F3 t-l i — § I L 1- - © -" P —c. f n -B-i. t—l•H — Hc~ y 4- !P-- -in CU c •r ^  •P y •t- •rjl 4-J — r —p —{  •* - - t j —d • — n .... h ..( j-— i — * _co P- i-—i <I* r i -V +-«- <D Nj— t 1 rii i rii 1 tU 1 5--I- -1-— © - 1 s . F H »Q- < C J --Or n\ < h H - -Q}-}j { •**? ^ H-o — ft "si c to si < SI Tt h -C -1 "FT —or — o o —N" 1 f — o - h -l "O ;— -I-i s. — c --dJ- T r - • r ... "f --« «n H ~) v.1 c 1 d 00 * 1 1) b= N-* ••s o 1 i *C 1 H ] 83 Table X L I I I . C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Members of Parliament  Opposed to Townsite Autonomy Number of Score Respondents I n f l u e n t i a l V a r i a b l e s ( i n order of importance) -0.619 18 1. previous occupation — no response, lawyer, educator, medicine, b l u e - c o l l a r worker 2. Province — T e r r i t o r i e s , Saskatchewan, O n t a r i o , Quebec, P.E.I. 3. age — no response, 31-50 yea r s . -0.501 8 1. previous occupation — p r i v a t e business, engineer, a g r i c u l t u r e , business management 2. income — no response, $10,000 - $29,999 3. age — no response, 31-50 years 4. Province — T e r r i t o r i e s , Manitoba, O n t a r i o , Nova S c o t i a . -0.350 9 1. previous occupation — no response, lawyer, educator, medicine, b l u e - c o l l a r worker 2. Province — B.C., A l b e r t a , Manitoba, Nova S c o t i a , New Brunswick 3. c o n s t i t u e n c y — urban, r u r a l . Study of Tables XX-XLIII i n c l u s i v e shows that f o r any given p o s i t i v e or negative score, i t was p o s s i b l e to i d e n t i f y the v a r i a b l e s and the order of the v a r i a b l e s which c o n t r i b u t e d to d i f f e r e n c e s i n any given score. I t was not p o s s i b l e , however, to i d e n t i f y any g e n e r a l i z e d p a t t e r n s of respondent c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s between p o s i t i v e and negative score groups e i t h e r w i t h i n a given p o l i c y p a t t e r n or between p o l i c y p a t t e r n s . 84 CHAPTER 6  CONCLUSIONS Summary This study has focussed on Canada's Members of Parliament and t h e i r understanding of the N a t i o n a l Parks P o l i c y . An attempt has been made to define a number of s c a l e s that r e l a t e to the dimensions t h a t a planner i s concerned w i t h i n the planning of n a t i o n a l parks and to see i f the Members of Parliament viewed the s c a l e s as d e f i n i n g autonomous p o l i c y areas. The study has, a t the same time, examined the r e s u l t s a t t a i n e d to see i f the way the p o l i t i c i a n responds was r e l a t e d t o socio-economic, p o l i t i c a l and park c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . The mail-back q u e s t i o n n a i r e technique was found to be u n s a t i s f a c t o r y i n a s s u r i n g a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e sample. On the b a s i s of the low response r a t e (33%) and the r e s u l t s of chi-square a n a l y s i s of the sample r e l a t i v e to socio-economic, p o l i t i c a l and park c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , i t was concluded that the present sample was not r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of the whole House of Commons. As a consequence, though i t i s acceptable to proceed w i t h a n a l y s i s c e n t r a l to the study purpose, the r e s u l t s can not be taken as being r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of the Members of Parliament at l a r g e . F a c t o r a n a l y s i s of the seven p o l i c y areas was found to be a v a l i d means of a n a l y z i n g the questions f o r i n t e r n a l c onsistency. The r e s u l t was that w i t h i n each p o l i c y area the Members of Parliament who p a r t i c i p a t e d i n the study i d e n t i f i e d a s e r i e s of dimensions or p o l i c y p a t t e r n s based on t h e i r responses to the questions. This i s co n t r a r y to the view of the park 85 planner, who i n t e r p r e t s the seven p o l i c y areas as being autonomous and thereby forming a sound base f o r the p r e p a r a t i o n of park p l a n s . The p a r t i c u l a r p o l i t i c i a n s i n question i d e n t i f i e d the f o l l o w i n g as forming separate p o l i c y concerns: - resource development inconspicuous resource development t r a n s p o r t a t i o n w i t h minimum impairment - maximum t r a n s p o r t a t i o n development - no a i r p o r t development t r a d i t i o n a l r e c r e a t i o n a l l - t e r r a i n v e h i c l e s h i g h cost, f a s t moving water-based r e c r e a t i o n - low c o s t , slow moving water-based r e c r e a t i o n phasing out townsites by l i m i t i n g developments - r e t a i n townsites and m a i n t a i n high standards townsite autonomy. Four v a r i a b l e s (non-commercial f o r e s t operations, d r i v i n g f o r p l e a -sure, hunting and l i m i t i n g the number of townsites to those p r e s e n t l y e x i s t i n g ) d i d not develop s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t loadings w i t h i n any of the p a t t e r n s generated. I t i s not p o s s i b l e t o draw any c o n c l u s i o n s from these r e s u l t s . The loadings are d i v i d e d between the v a r i o u s f a c t o r patterns generated. S t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t loadings f o r these v a r i -ables might have developed i f a greater number of p a t t e r n s had been pro-grammed. Scores were developed f o r each of the respondents on the twelve p o l i c y p a t t e r n s . The s c a l e of score i n d i c a t e d how any one of the 86 respondents viewed the v a r i o u s p a t t e r n s . The AID technique computer program was used to i d e n t i f y the most i n f l u e n t i a l socio-economic, p o l i t i c a l and park c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s which were most c l o s e l y a s s o c i a t e d w i t h d i f f e r e n c e s i n scores. I t was p o s s i b l e to i d e n t i f y the v a r i a b l e s and t h e i r order of i n f l u e n c e which c o n t r i b u t e d to d i f f e r e n c e s i n given scores. I t was not p o s s i b l e , however, to i d e n t i f y any g e n e r a l i z e d p a t t e r n s of respondent c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s between p o s i t i v e and negative score groups, e i t h e r w i t h i n a given p o l i c y p a t t e r n or between pa t t e r n s . The most i n f l u e n t i a l v a r i a b l e s (respondent c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ) r e l a t i v e to d i f f e r e n c e s i n scores are presented i n Tables XLIV to LV. Table LVI summarizes the i n f o r m a t i o n from the previous twelve t a b l e s . The two most i n f l u e n t i a l v a r i a b l e s were previous occupation and province. The park-o r i e n t e d v a r i a b l e s ( l a s t v i s i t to a N a t i o n a l Park, d i s t a n c e to nearest N a t i o n a l Park, park age, percentage of constituency as a N a t i o n a l Park) were not found to be i n f l u e n t i a l . Such obvious p o l i t i c a l and s o c i o -economic v a r i a b l e s as p o l i t i c a l p a r t y , number of years as a Member of Parliament, age, education and place of childhood were shown to be l e s s i n f l u e n t i a l . The r e s u l t s would suggest t h a t any f u t u r e s t u d i e s i n v e s t i -gating the r e l a t i o n s h i p s between Members of Parliament and N a t i o n a l Park p o l i c i e s should concentrate on c l a r i f y i n g the nature of t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p . 87 Table XLIV. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT SCORES AND RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS BEST.SCORES ALL SCORES Age Income Previous Occupation Education Place of Childhood Number of Years as a Member of Parliament P o l i t i c a l P a r t y Province Constituency Last V i s i t to a N a t i o n a l Park Distance t o nearest N a t i o n a l Park Park Age Percentage of Constituency as a N a t i o n a l Park Table XLV. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN INCONSPICUOUS RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT SCORES AND RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS BEST SCORES ALL SCORES Age Income Previous Occupation Education P l a c e of Childhood Number of Years as a Member of Parliament P o l i t i c a l P a r t y Province Constituency Last V i s i t to a N a t i o n a l Park Distance t o nearest N a t i o n a l Park Park Age Percentage of Constituency as a N a t i o n a l Park 2 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 4 1 4 88 Table XLVI. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TRANSPORTATION WITH •MINIMUM IMPAIRMENT SCORES AND RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS BEST SCORES ALL SCORES Age 1 Income — — Previous Occupation 2 1 Education P l a c e of Childhood Number of Years as a Member of — — Parliament P o l i t i c a l P a r t y Province 1 1 Constituency 1 1 Last V i s i t to a N a t i o n a l Park — 1 Distance t o nearest N a t i o n a l Park Park Age Percentage of Constituency as a — — N a t i o n a l Park Table XLVII. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MAXIMUM TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT SCORES AND RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS BEST SCORES ALL SCORES Age Income — — Previous Occupation 2 3 Education 1 1 Place of Childhood — Number of Years as a Member of Parliament P o l i t i c a l P a r t y — Province 1 4 Constituency — — L a s t V i s i t to a N a t i o n a l Park — 3 Distance to nearest N a t i o n a l Park Park Age Percentage of Constituency as a N a t i o n a l Park 89 Table X L V I I I . RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN NO AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT SCORES AND RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS BEST SCORES ALL SCORES Age Income Previous Occupation Education Place of Childhood Number of Years as a Member of Parliament P o l i t i c a l Party-Province Constituency L a s t V i s i t to a N a t i o n a l Park D i s t a n c e to nearest N a t i o n a l Park Park Age Percentage of Constituency as a N a t i o n a l Park Table XLIX. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TRADITIONAL RECREATION SCORES AND RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS BEST SCORES ALL SCORES Age Income Previous Occupation Education P l a c e of Childhood Number of Years as a Member of Parliament P o l i t i c a l P a r t y Province Constituency L a s t V i s i t to a N a t i o n a l Park Park Age Percentage of Constituency as a N a t i o n a l Park 1 2 1 2 4 1 1 3 1 1 9 0 Table L. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ALL-TERRAIN VEHICLE USE SCORES AND RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS BEST SCORES ALL SCORES Age Income 1 1 Previous Occupation 2 3 Education Place of Childhood ~ 1 Number of Years as a Member of — — Parliament P o l i t i c a l Party Province 2 3 Constituency — 2 Last V i s i t to a N a t i o n a l Park — — Park Age Percentage of Constituency as a — N a t i o n a l Park Table L I . RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HIGH COST, FAST-MOVING, WATER-BASED RECREATION SCORES AND RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS BEST SCORES ALL SCORES Age Income 1 1 Previous Occupation 1 2 Education P l a c e of Childhood 1 — Number of Years as a Member of — — Parliament P o l i t i c a l P a r t y Province 2 3 Constituency — 2 L a s t V i s i t to a N a t i o n a l Park Park Age Percentage of Constituency as a N a t i o n a l Park 91 Table L I I . RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LOW COST, SLOW-MOVING, WATER-BASED RECREATION SCORES AND RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS BEST SCORES ALL SCORES Age Income 1 Previous Occupation — Education — Place of Childhood Number of Years as a Member of — Parliament P o l i t i c a l P a r t y 2 Province 1 Constituency — Last V i s i t to a N a t i o n a l Park — Park Age Percentage of Constituency as a N a t i o n a l Park Table L I I I . RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PHASING-OUT TOWNSITES BY  LIMITING DEVELOPMENT SCORES AND RESPONDENT  CHARACTERISTICS RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS BEST SCORES ALL SCORES Age Income 1 1 Previous Occupation 1 2 Education — 1 Place of Childhood Number of Years as a Member of — 1 Parliament P o l i t i c a l P a r t y — 2 Province 2 3 Constituency — — Last V i s i t to a N a t i o n a l Park Park Age Percentage of Constituency as a — — N a t i o n a l Park 92 Table LIV. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN RETAINING TOWNSITES AND MAINTAINING HIGH STANDARDS SCORES AND RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS BEST SCORES ALL SCORES Age Income 1 1 Previous Occupation 2 4 Education — 1 Place of Childhood — 1 Number of Years as a Member of — Parliament P o l i t i c a l P a r t y — Province 2 4 Constituency — Last V i s i t to a N a t i o n a l Park — Park Age Percentage of Constituency as a — — N a t i o n a l Park Table LV. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TOWNSITE AUTONOMY SCORES AND RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS BEST SCORES ALL SCORES Age 1 2 Income 1 2 Previous Occupation 2 4 Education — — Place of Childhood Number of Years as a Member of — — Parliament P o l i t i c a l P a r t y — Province 1 3 Constituency — 2 La s t V i s i t to a N a t i o n a l Park — — Park Age — — Percentage of Constituency as a N a t i o n a l Park 93 Table LVI. SUMMARY OF RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN SCORES AND RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS BEST SCORES ALL SCORES Age 3 3 Income 9 10 Previous Occupation 19 24 Education 2 3 Place of Childhood 2 8 Number of Years as a Member of — 1 Parliament P o l i t i c a l P a r t y 3 6 Province 16 28 Constituency 2 7 L a s t V i s i t to a N a t i o n a l Park — 4 Distance to nearest N a t i o n a l Park — Park Age — Percentage of Constituency as a — -N a t i o n a l Park A p p l i c a t i o n to Park Planning A N a t i o n a l Park planner i s concerned w i t h the a l l o c a t i o n of l a n d -uses i n such a way as to provide an optimum balance between p r e s e r v a t i o n and use of the park la n d . As a p r o f e s s i o n a l , the planner's primary r e s p o n s i b i l i t y i s the p r e p a r a t i o n of v i a b l e land-use plans w i t h i n para-meters defined by the N a t i o n a l Parks P o l i c y . This r e q u i r e s a c o n s i s t a n t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of p o l i c y which p r o p e r l y r e f l e c t s the b a s i c i n t e n t or purpose of the v a r i o u s p o l i c y areas. While the p o l i t i c i a n i s not i n -v o l v e d d i r e c t l y i n the planning process, h i s i n f l u e n c e i s o f t e n noticed when p a r t i c u l a r park plans are reviewed at v a r i o u s l e v e l s i n the h i e r -archy of Parks Canada. The f a c t that a c e r t a i n segment of the Members of Parliament, as defined by t h i s study, d i d not view p o l i c y i n the same manner as the park planner would suggest that p o l i t i c a l i n t e r e s t s w i l l demand changes i n the planning approach to park p r e s e r v a t i o n and use. The p r o f e s s i o n a l p o s i t i o n of the park planner must remain f r e e of 94 p o l i t i c a l c o n s t r a i n t s i n the planning process. However, r e c o g n i z i n g the d i f f e r e n c e s i n p o l i c y i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , the planner must prepare a p l a n which provides r e a l i s t i c a l t e r n a t i v e s to counter the concerns expressed by the p o l i t i c i a n . Areas of Future Study The assumption has been made i n the study t h a t park planners view the v a r i o u s p o l i c y areas as being i n t e r n a l l y c o n s i s t e n t such as to d e f i n e a s i n g l e s c a l e and thereby form autonomous p o l i c y areas. A study could be undertaken to v e r i f y t h i s assumption. I t would be d e s i r a b l e to use the same qu e s t i o n n a i r e i n order to provide the necessary l e v e l of con-s i s t e n c y between s t u d i e s . The r e l a t i o n s h i p between scores and respondent c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s should a l s o be explored i n the study. The conclusions of the study p o i n t to the need to undertake the same study at v a r i o u s i n t e r v a l s as a necessary means of assessing changes i n i n f l u e n t i a l v a r i a b l e s and i n the assessing the r e l a t i v e s t a b i l i t y of the present conclusions. The r o l e of the p u b l i c i n the decision-making process could a l s o be studie d i n the same manner as was used i n the present study. The concerns of the p u b l i c expressed through the p u b l i c hearing process are regarded by Parks Canada as an important i n d i c a t o r of the v i a b i l i t y of i n d i v i d u a l park p l a n s . The past p u b l i c hearings have l e d to the p o l a r i z a t i o n of opinions regarding the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of park p o l i c i e s and a l s o have shown that a major review of p o l i c y w i l l be r e q u i r e d i n the near f u t u r e . The p o s s i b i l i t y of n a t i o n a l p u b l i c hearings on the N a t i o n a l Parks P o l i c y would present a unique o p p o r t u n i t y f o r a study to be made of those people who would be concerned enough to present b r i e f s at the hearings. 95 LITERATURE CITED PUBLIC DOCUMENTS Canada, 1964, Department of Indian A f f a i r s and Northern Development, N a t i o n a l Parks P o l i c y , N a t i o n a l and H i s t o r i c Parks Branch, Ottawa, 21 p. Canada, 1906, Department of the I n t e r i o r , Report of the Rocky Mountain Park of Canada, Report of the Superintendent, Annual Report of 1906, Ottawa. Canada, 1907, Department of the I n t e r i o r , Report of the Rocky Mountain Park of Canada, Report of the Superintendent, Annual Report of 1907, Ottawa. Canada, 1912, Department of the I n t e r i o r , Report of the Commissioner of Dominion Parks, Annual Report 1912, Ottawa. Canada, 1913, Department of the I n t e r i o r , Report of the Commissioner of Dominion Parks, Annual Report 1913, Ottawa. Canada, 1915, Department of the I n t e r i o r , Report of the Commissioner of Dominion Parks, Annual Report, 1915, Ottawa. Canada, 1918, Department of the I n t e r i o r , Report of the Commisioner of Dominion Parks, Annual Report 1918, Ottawa. Canada, 1919, Department of the I n t e r i o r , Report of the Commissioner of Dominion Parks Annual Report, 1919, Ottawa. Canada, 1912, Department of the I n t e r i o r , Report of the C h i e f Superintend-ent of Dominion Parks, Annual Report, 1912, Edmonton. Canada, 1934, Department of the I n t e r i o r , Report of the Commissioner, N a t i o n a l Parks Branch, Ottawa. Canada, 1960, Hansard's House of Commons Debates, Volume V I , T h i r d Session, Twenty-fourth Parliament, Ottawa. P. 6857-8. Canada, 1887, House of Commons Debates, Volume 2, May 3, 1887. P. 233. Canada, 1887, House of Commons Debates, Volume 2, A p r i l 29, 1887. P. 195-196. Canada, 1964, House of Commons Debates, Volume V I I , Second Session, Twenty-sixth Parliament, Ottawa. Canada, 1966, House of Commons, Standing Committee on Northern A f f a i r s and N a t i o n a l Resources, Minutes of Proceedings and Evidence, No. 20, F i r s t S ession, Twenty-seventh Parliament, Ottawa. 96 Canada, 1911, Dominion Forest Reserves and Parks A c t . S t a t u t e s of Canada, 1-2 George V (1911) . Canada, 1930, N a t i o n a l Parks Act, Chapter 33, S t a t u t e s of Canada, 1930. Canada, 1952, The N a t i o n a l Parks A c t , C. 189, Revised S t a t u t e s of Canada. Canada, 1887, Rocky Mountain Parks A c t , Chapter 32, S t a t u t e s of Canada, 50-51 V i c t o r i a . Canada, 1962, Royal Commission on Government O r g a n i z a t i o n , Volume 2, Ottawa. BOOKS Anonymous, 1971, Canada's 28th Parliament, A Guide to the Members, t h e i r C o n s t i t u e n c i e s and t h e i r Government, Metheun. Nie, N., D. H. Bent, C. H. H u l l , 1970, SPSS ( S t a t i s t i c a l Package f o r the S o c i a l S c i e n c e s ) , New York: McGraw-Hill, p. 208-244. ARTICLES AND PERIODICALS Hodgetts, J . E., 1957, "The C i v i l S e rvice and P o l i c y Formation." Canadian J o u r n a l of Economics and P o l i t i c a l Science, V o l . 23, p. 469. REPORTS AND PAPERS Brown, R. C , 1968, The D o c t r i n e of Usefulness: N a t u r a l Resources and N a t i o n a l Parks P o l i c y i n Canada, 1887-1914. The Canadian N a t i o n a l Parks: Today and Tomorrow. A paper f o r the Conference i n Calgary, A l b e r t a , October, 1968. 20 p. C h r i s t i a n Science P u b l i s h i n g S o c i e t y , " W i l l Success S p o i l the N a t i o n a l Parks?" A C h r i s t i a n Science Monitor R e p r i n t , 1968. Hamilton, Honourable A l v i n , 1959, Re c r e a t i o n and T o u r i s t Development. An address at the Convocation Banquet of the 1959 Convention of the P u b l i c School Trustees A s s o c i a t i o n of Ontario, F o r t W i l l i a m , O n t a r i o . Souquist, J . A. and J . N. Morgan, 1964, The D e t e c t i o n of I n t e r a c t i o n E f f e c t s (AID), Monograph #35, Survey Research Center, I n s t i t u t e of S o c i a l Research, The U n i v e r s i t y of Michigan. 162 p. 97 APPENDIX A FACULTY OF FORESTRY UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Vancouver 8, B.C. NATIONAL PARKS POLICY STUDY This questionnaire i s sent i n response to your indication of willingness to participate i n this study. Name of respondent: Confidential: A l l information which would permit identification of the individual w i l l be held s t r i c t l y confidential; w i l l be used only for s t a t i s t i c a l purposes for this study and w i l l NOT be disclosed or released to others for any other purpose. QUESTIONNAIRE THEME Our present National Park Policy i s the focus of this study. Striving for both preservation and public enjoyment presents a dilemma. The prominence of subjective personal elements and the severe limitations of technological engineering solutions have a l l intensified the uncertainty surrounding National Parks Policy. GENERAL INFORMATION One segment of the present policy - that pertaining to private and commercial leasing of parklands - has been omitted. This was done since i t i s presently before the Supreme Court. The last section requests certain background information about yourself. INSTRUCTIONS The study i s based on your OWN personal opinions. Attempt to avoid the expressed feelings of your constituents when answering. Please read each opening statement carefully and then proceed with each question as indicated. Section 1: PARK INTEGRITY 98 Present P o l i c y : "Our most fundamental and important o b l i g a t i o n i n the administration of the Act i s to preserve from impairment a l l s i g n i f i c a n t objects and features of nature i n the parks ... The following a c t i v i t i e s are detrimental to natural h i s t o r y values and should not be permitted i n a National Park: (i) Grazing of domestic stock; ( i i ) P o l l u t i o n of a i r , s o i l or water; ( i i i ) Construction and operation of h y d r o - e l e c t r i c power i n s t a l l a t i o n s and other water diversions or impoundments f o r i n d u s t r i a l purposes; (iv) The mining or harvesting of the resources of land or water f o r the primary purposes o f commercial gain." Do you agree with t h i s p o l i c y ? Yes • (1-1) No Q (1-2) Undecided []] (1-3) I f undecided, Why?: Regardless o f answer, check a l l the statements below with which you agree; 1-4 Q A wilderness zone should contain a completely natural f o r e s t . 1-5 £ j Forest f i r e s are part of the natural ecosystem and should be permitted to burn. 1-6 Q Only f o r e s t operations which are p r i m a r i l y concerned with the management of the forests f o r p r o t e c t i o n and maintenance of National Park values should be permitted. 1-7 Present timber berths e x i s t i n g i n parks should be allowed. 1-8 | j Those timber berths which were i n existence p r i o r to park establishment must be purchased i n order to guarantee maintenance of park values. 1-9 j^j Those areas which contain prime timber should be removed from park status and timber r i g h t s s o l d . 1-10 Q Considering the area o f land a v a i l a b l e i n the Western mountain parks, commercial logging would not be detrimental to park values. 1-11 Q The type of f o r e s t management within n a t i o n a l parks depends on the most desirable use of an area. 1-12 Q Outstanding mining claims which e x i s t within a park should be removed. 1-13 Q Mining should be allowed since i t s value exceeds preservation-recreation values. 1-14 Q Underground mining should be allowed; surface mining should not be. 1-1.5 QT. Hydro-electric power dams do not impair park values and should be considered i n l i g h t of t h e i r importance to the economy. 1-16 Q Campgrounds should be alternated as the campgrounds become impaired through over-use and abuse. 1-17 Sewage treatment plants must be constructed to abate p o l l u t i o n of r i v e r s adjacent to park townsites. Others: Section 2: PARK ZONING 99 Do you hold the view that today wilderness i s valuable? Y e s • (2-1) No • (2-2) Why?: Do wilderness recreation and symbolic wilderness values have meaning for you? Yes Q (2-3) No (~j (2-4) Why?: Park policy states that a zoning plan for each park w i l l be prepared in accordance with the statement of purpose for that park. For large national parks, the basic breakdown i s : (a) wilderness; and (b) transportation zones, including arteries of travel and communication and the accommodation and activity centres of the park. Do you agree with this zoning concept? Yes Q (2-5) No Q] (2-6) Undecided Q] (2-7) If undecided, Why?: Regardless of answer, check a l l those statements below with which you agree: 2-8 0] The zoning concept should be kept simple so as to f a c i l i t a t e ready recognition by the public. 2-9 Q Zoning might exclude certain uses not defined within such a concept. 2-10 Q Zoning tends to concentrate use. 2-11 Q The zones, as are park boundaries, should be delineated by legal descriptions and legislation to give them permanence and security. 2-12 []j The wilderness zone should have limited recreation use. 2-13 Q The wilderness zone should have no permanent developments (other than t r a i l s ) . 2-14 P ] Wilderness areas should be developed more than at present, i.e., road access provided. 2-15 • The transition zone is too broadly defined and should be subdivided into such divisions as semi-wilderness (including recreation centres) and service centres. Others: Section 3: ACCESS AND VISITOR MANAGEMENT 100 Park policy views railroads, commercial highways and airports as impairments of park values. The most acceptable and preferred forms of access are travel by waterways, t r a i l s and well-planned park roads. Do you (3-1) ^ \ fu l l y agree (3-2) ] partially agree with this policy (3-3) =j ful l y disagree If fully agree, go to 3-A; i f fully disagree, go to 3-B (next page); i f p artially agree, then state Why below: 3-A 3-4 3-5 3-6 3-7 3-8 3-9 3-10 Arterial highways should be built outside parks to fa c i l i t a t e through t r a f f i c which has a non-park destination. The large western national parks presently have sufficient road access. Park roads should be designed to a good standard for safe driving, to provide a sense of oneness with nature and not for high speed travel. Road location, design and construction must keep impairment of the landscape to a minimum. The extent of the park road system within any zone should be in keeping with the character of that zone. I support a ban on commercial airports because: ' ' costs of construction and maintenance would be too high, could set a precedent in future parks, are a form of noise pollution. would merely add to the problems of vi s i t o r management, ^adjacent to railways and arterial highways which presently exist in parks should be removed from park status and control and viewed rather as transport corridors under s t r i c t easement legislation. Others: Section 3: ACCESS AND VISITOR MANAGEMENT (Cont'd.) 3-B Check those statements with which you agree: Transportation systems within parks should be further developed into a l l park acreage so as to f a c i l i t a t e the greatest and easiest movements of visitors possible. High speed roads can be developed in parks as they do not impair the experience of the v i s i t . Airport f a c i l i t i e s for small aircraft should be developed to allow more visitors to v i s i t the park. Airports are necessary as private aircraft are becoming an increasingly important form of transport. Fire access roads should be opened to the public as a means of alleviating pressures on those areas presently being used. 3-11 3-12 • 3-13 • 3-14 • 3-15 • Others: d i f f i c u l t parks, we From your category, 3-16 • Though there are no specific policy statements concerning vis i t o r management, i t i s a natural extension of the access policy. It becomes to maintain park values for tie future when today, i n many suffer from too many people concentrated i n too small an area, viewpoint, rank order by broad category and then within each from most to least desirable, the following proposals: Expansion (a) U Expansion of the park system by increasing the number of parks. (b) Q Provide greater access to more areas in the present system of parks. (c) Q Build more campgrounds, lodges and roads in present development areas to take care of more people. Rationing (a) Q Ration use on a f i r s t come, f i r s t serve, basis. Increase entrance fees so as to limit the number of visitors. A permit and reservation system, allowing people to v i s i t the park only during the period on the permit. The banning of private automobiles and the provision of a public transit system. Limit the stay i n parks to the number of days i t takes to see the major attractions, with a maximum of three days. Reserve most of the campground space and vi s i t o r f a c i l i t i e s for those who live more than 200 miles away. Take accommodation f a c i l i t i e s out of the parks and encourage their provision through the private sector outside the park. 3-17 • ( b J Q <*>• ( « > • ( « • <*>• : 102 Section 3: ACCESS AND VISITOR MANAGEMENT (Cont'd.) What i s to be the recreation role of national parks? The problem i s to decide what types of recreation use are appropriate i n national parks within the concept of preservation of t r u l y national values. National parks can not be a l l things to a l l people. Consequently, check those recreation a c t i v i t i e s which you f e e l SHOULD be allowed and are i n keeping with the basic purpose of our national parks. A. Land-oriented a c t i v i t i e s Q camping • driving for pleasure Q dune-buggy racing • hiking O hunting • mountain climbing Q horseback r i d i n g (_ rock c o l l e c t i n g • scenic viewing ~| skidooing O snow ski i n g Others: B. Water-oriented a c t i v i t i e s Q canoeing • f i s h i n g Qpower boating • s a i l i n g • water s k i i n g • swimming (lakes or rivers) Others: C. Urban-oriented a c t i v i t i e s Should presently existing forms of —, . . recreation which you have NOT checked • tennis , ^ ^ _ , , _ Q g 0 j f ky phased-out of our national parks? Q lawn bowling Agree Q Disagree £_ • indoor bowling • b i l l i a r d s W h y :  • baseball Q f o o t b a l l and soccer • swimming (pool) Others: 103 Section 4: TOWNSITES Policy regarding townsites i n future parks states, "A townsite i s an intrusion and should be permitted to develop i n a park only i f , by reason of the services i t provides, the v i s i t o r i s better able to enjoy the park for what i t i s . " This does not resolve the problems connected with those townsites which presently e x i s t . Check those statements with which you agree regarding townsites: 4 - 1 L_l A l l townsites should be phased-out of a l l e xisting parks. 4 - 2 ^2 T n e number of establishments providing a service should be s u f f i c i e n t only to ensure competition and to s a t i s f y demand. 4 - 3 Q Only persons engaged i n the administration of the park or the supply of necessary v i s i t o r services and t h e i r dependents should be permitted permanent residence i n the park. 4 - 4 0] T h e number of townsites should be lim i t e d to those existing now. 4 - 5 J ~ J Building architecture should be i n harmony with the natural environment. 4 - 6 0] Construction and maintenance standards should be higher i n park townsites than elsewhere. 4 - 7 0] Park townsites should provide a l l the extra entertainment and services common to other urban areas throughout Canada. 4 - 8 0] Provision should be made to f a c i l i t a t e i n a l l park townsites, the operation of municipal self-government. 4 - 9 0] Changes should be i n i t i a t e d i n park rental and leasing p o l i c y to provide for the receipt of more equitable and r e a l i s t i c rentals from residents and concessionaires. 4 - 1 0 0] Only v i s i t o r - o r i e n t e d services should be permitted i n park townsites. Others: 104 Section 5: ROLE OF NATIONAL PARKS IN EDUCATION As national parks are "dedicated to the people of Canada f or t h e i r b e n e f i t , education and enjoyment", appropriate p r o v i s i o n to carry out t h i s educational function i s required. In your opinion what i s the kind of education r e f e r r e d to? Specify: Are the parks presently f u l f i l l i n g t h i s educational role; Specify: How should t h i s function be c a r r i e d out? Specify: 105 Section 6: GENERAL 1. The best long-term management tool with which to minimize the resource protection versus use conflict, ever a more serious problem in the parks, i s the inclusion of maximum park acreage i n wilderness and the adoption of the planning concept whereby recreation pressures could be redirected in part, from the parks to the much larger surrounding recreation regions. Do you agree Q (6-1) Disagree Q (6-2) Undecided Q (6-3) Give reasons: The present national parks system should be expanded i n order to provide representative examples of the nation's various natural landscape types. Do you agree Q (6-4) Disagree Q (6-5) Undecided Q (6-6) Should the National Park Service's suggested classification (that below) be adopted? (i) National Parks - areas of outstanding natural features, preservation would be the f i r s t consideration. (ii) National Shorelines - major units of ocean or very large lake shorelines, which due to their unique quality are of national significance. ( i i i ) National Recreation Areas - areas which are primarily useful for recreational purposes, in which the obligation to preserve the natural state i s distinctly secondary. (iv) National Nature Preserves, Sites, or Monuments - areas appropriate for the nation to preserve, but which perhaps due to lack of size or other reasons do not qualify as National Parks. (v) National Historic Sites, Features or Areas. Do you agree [~J (6-7) Disagree Q (6-8) Undecided Q (6-9) 4. National Parks Policy should be reviewed periodically by: 6-10 Q (a) an appointed national advisory board made up of citizens from across the nation; OR 6-11 Q (b) by the administrators within the National Park Service. Section 6: GENERAL (Cont'd.) 106 National park planning should be subject to public hearings prior to finalization of park master planning. Yes []]] (6-12) No Q (6-13) If "Yes", check one of t h e following: 6-14 (a) hearings should be held only within the region of the park; OR 6-15 Q (b) hearings should be held at various centres across the nation. Do you feel there is a need for a comprehensive National Recreation Study to determine the demand and supply of recreation resources in Canada? Yes Q (6-16) No j~J (6-17) No opinion Q (6-18) Do you see a need for greater coordination at the Federal level of agencies concerned with recreation? Yes Q (6-19) No • (6-20) No opinion £ ] (6-21) If "Yes", what type or form of coordination do you envisage?: 107 Section 7: SOCIO-ECONOMIC INFORMATION 1. • 2. • 3. • 21-30 31-40 41-50 4. 5. 6. • • • 51-60 61-70 over 70 Income: Check the box which corresponds to your t o t a l family income during 1968: 1. • under $10,000 3. 2. • $10,000 - $14,999 3. • $15,000 - $19,999 4. 4. • $20,000 - $24,999 5. • $25,000 - $29,999 5. 6. • $30,000 - $34,999 6. 7. • $35,000 - $39,999 7. 8. • Over $40,000 3. Number of years as a Member of Parliament: Your occupation outside of being a Member of Parliament: 6. Education: Check the l a s t year of formal education completed: Public school 1 • 2 3 • • High school 1 2 3 • • • 4 • 4 • 5 • 5 • 6 • 6 • 1. • 2. • Check the box below which most c l o s e l y corresponds to the type of area i n which your childhood was spent: Metropolis (over 1 m i l l i o n ) Big c i t y (250,000 -1 m i l l i o n ) • Medium c i t y (50,000 -250,000) • Small c i t y (10,000 -50,000) • Town (1,000 - 10,000) O V i l l a g e (under 1,000) • Farm 7. Which of the following most cl o s e l y describes your constituency: 1. Q urban 2. r u r a l 3. • both When d i d you l a s t v i s i t one of Canada's National Parks: Do you consider y o u r s e l f : 1 . • a frequent v i s i t o r 2 . 0 an occasional v i s i t o r 3. D a seldom v i s i t o r to Canada's National Parks? University 1 2 3 4 5+ • • • • • THANKYOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION APPENDIX B Scores* Respondent Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 -606 -892 -1564 -829 -522 252 -420 -673 308 977 788 -7 2 1026 -874 -1639 950 -214 313 -681 1593 -355 1028 223 750 3 2412 1492 -1366 2080 -280 -1164 -1096 -665 279 -1230 312 188 4 -589 1156 -806 -1015 250 -954 -639 2031 -233 -1015 -1215 143 5 -634 -993 -56 -655 288 409 -214 -673 308 -1389 217 -545 6 -618 1118 866 -338 -406 199 -555 -894 187 742 -482 -608 7 -660 1200 931 -534 458 294 -89 -673 308 977 788 -7 8 -606 -892 612 -577 -453 494 -404 -673 308 -1352 827 -700 9 -601 -908 246 -657 -633 -558 -701 -673 308 -1174 -1309 -591 10 1241 -885 1110 2554 259 93 2221 1385 239 1160 -820 275 11 -515 -1135 832 -626 -105 252 -420 -673 308 670 389 -736 12 -634 -993 775 -549 -12 326 -414 -673 308 1027 863 772 13 -541 1058 566 -614 278 367 -545 -673 308 -1156 144 175 14 -551 1014 862 984 -1099 379 855 2031 -233 -1033 -13 1104 15 -515 -1135 713 -508 1097 179 1171 -673 308 785 213 -273 16 -487 -1034 722 -659 -152 367 -545 -665 279 -1189 943 685 17 419 -1155 192 371 2309 367 -545 -673 308 -1174 -1309 -591 18 920 -688 767 -431 -969 199 -555 1385 239 1069 855 1247 19 -188 1280 -1564 -829 -522 367 -545 1385 239 977 788 -7 20 -601 -908 -1031 -639 2397 252 -420 -673 308 1101 695 759 21 -481 -1050 539 -475 1172 252 -420 -887 159 803 -654 -1212 22 59 252 354 -384 1384 441 -539 1385 239 -1045 586 7 23 -481 -1050 752 -505 325 379 -278 -894 187 -1463 1025 -511 24 -603 872 -1564 -829 -522 137 840 -673 308 791 -190 315 25 -101 1292 -1568 -420 -415 252 -420 -665 279 -994 20 765 26 361 -1268 -1366 2080 -280 93 2221 1385 239 -991 -662 1558 27 -152 1029 -1564 -829 -522 137 840 1385 239 -927 -1277 1085 28 -310 -1050 428 -507 1124 367 -545 1372 -475 813 -1034 28 APPENDIX B Scores (continued) Respondent 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number 29 -482 970 -1366 2080 -280 252 -420 -673 308 -937 -257 -134 30 -634 -993 698 -369 -1054 252 -420 -665 279 1028 223 750 31 461 -424 -1682 -67 -160 252 714 -673 308 903 316 -16 32 92 -1071 428 -507 1124 379 -278 -665 279 682 -209 360 33 647 703 333 -193 -1165 -369 -821 -665 279 -1174 -1309 -591 34 -398 957 -1564 -829 -522 137 840 2031 -233 1088 -50 -218 35 -361 -952 821 -566 411 367 -545 -673 308 780 831 -904 36 -283 -948 712 -484 110 494 -404 -665 279 -1119 753 20 37 -481 -1050 483 -401 886 252 714 -673 308 812 -394 49 38 2377 1166 695 296 -878 179 1171 -673 308 -1045 586 7 39 1456 -1044 592 -397 -894 367 -545 879 -4831 803 -654 -1212 40 -481 -1050 493 -458 749 367 -545 -673 308 977 788 -7 41 -78 1093 296 423 1162 137 840 -673 308 -1224 -589 837 42 -601 -908 775 -549 -12 367 -545 -673 308 691 -1159 -881 43 566 957 -1458 -545 -613 367 -545 -673 308 -1278 659 -713 44 566 957 587 -402 -1101 264 981 2031 -233 -920 -148 752 45 -601 -908 646 802 -614 441 -539 -665 279 1088 -50 -218 46 -14 930 -1564 -829 -522 252 -420 -1111 186 -1011 -89 -121 47 2338 -998 612 -577 -453 293 1906 -673 308 670 1029 -715 48 -430 -908 221 -482 -1282 367 -545 -665 279 -921 493 773 49 2179 1065 996 2632 -249 294 -89 2031 -233 976 -454 477 50 1296 675 -1366 2080 -280 137 840 -665 279 835 928 527 51 -1061 1076 -1564 -829 -522 -4432 -677 -1179 -4763 -1174 -1309 -591 52 781 1085 -215 . 701 2133 367 -545 -1103 157 909 -1278 -1210 53 -1028 1162 -1564 -829 -522 252 -420 -673 308 -920 -148 752 54 227 -788 908 -102 -122 -1994 465 1810 -353 -1422 1016 -35 55 -941 1174 -1415 472 -667 -354 -814 -1332 65 744 221 -749 56 1844 826 -1564 -829 -522 252 714 1385 239 1067 -490 1367 APPENDIX B Scores (continued) Respondent 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number 57 -909 1020 -88 120 2475 252 714 1385 239 729 -486 -1199 58 -449 1055 818 -200 19 252 -420 1593 -355 781 191 -935 59 238 -898 350 479 461 252 -420 -673 308 915 358 1102 60 -601 -908 886 -517 35 -443 -827 -665 279 812 -394 49 61 -555 1241 589 11 -787 367 -545 -665 279 -1465 321 -370 62 -81 1380 972 -54 -497 421 1187 1385 239 937 -1127 794 63 -738 1020 620 441 453 179 1171 1385 239 909 -1278 -1210 64 2332 1249 487 2721 761 -3941 -157 1385 239 901 252 147 65 -382 891 70 -189 -1015 367 -545 -673 308 855 23 -938 66 -601 -908 136 -358 2022 -4432 -677 -1179 -4763 1027 863 772 67 -941 1174 -1 86 -66 409 -214 -1111 186 -1153 -74 32 68 -634 -993 592 -397 -894 536 -73 1601 -384 744 862 -728 69 227 -788 -1564 -829 -522 -501 -273 -673 308 -1045 586 7 70 -514 -895 662 -495 466 137 840 1385 239 -1031 691 962 71 751 . -566 537 1665 -1401 536 -73 -894 187 744 862 -728 72 2144 1043 -1366 2080 -280 179 1171 1385 239 -992 -22 1579 73 -310 -1050 775 -549 -12 367 -545 -665 279 -1045 -55 -14 74 -1028 1162 526 920 587 379 -278 -673 308 -899 -1391 605 75 -634 -993 712 -484 110 241 -224 -673 308 744 862 -728 76 709 -1297 -1101 -34 1640 137 840 -673 308 -927 -1277 1085 77 -568 1197 606 937 -1231 -554 725 -1111 186 833 -1814 -1055 78 -942 934 -680 -706 -359 252 -420 -665 279 -1278 659 -713 79 -62 -583 592 -397 -894 313 -681 -894 187 -1339 932 255 80 41 845 866 -338 -406 -1132 1199 -673 308 1029 -1856 -159 81 -233 -869 985 489 -202 367 -545 1593 -355 670 1029 -715 82 -235 -978 707 -232 -29 326 -414 1593 -355 -1352 827 -700 83 -481 -1050 767 -431 -969 313 -681 1810 -353 1143 687 1234 84 -397 1197 645 -190 1080 51 1890 1810 -353 903 956 6 APPENDIX B Scores (continued) Respondent Number 10 11 12 85 86 87 2208 1453 -1366 2080 -280 51 1890 ;947 118 557 524 -384 -601 -908 706 -488 -97 -407 -950 -665 279 729 -486 -1199 332 -792 765 198 482 367 -545 -673 308 1026 159 913 * Scores 1 - Resource Development 2 - Inconspicuous Resource Development 3 - T r a n s p o r t a t i o n w i t h Minimum Impairment 4 - Maximum T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Development 5 - No A i r p o r t Development 6 - T r a d i t i o n a l R e c r e a t i o n 7 - A l l T e r r a i n V e h i c l e s 8 - High Cost, Fast-Moving Water-Based Recreation 9 - Low Cost, Slow-Moving Water-Based Recreation 10- Phasing Out Townsites by L i m i t i n g Development 11- Retain Townsites and M a i n t a i n High Standards 12- Townsite Autonomy 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0093131/manifest

Comment

Related Items