Alberta’s Land-use Framework – if you really care get informed!

(Find it at http://www.landuse.gov.ab.ca/ )

There is a process in train, or perhaps more accurately a train in process, that will impact us all when it comes to how public lands are managed and accessed.  We must participate and let our views be known.  There is a 41 page booklet available on the above site that provides background and I recommend that you read it to get up to speed.  But, if you haven't time or enough passion about your access to read it and the companion 15 page Workbook questionnaire I will try to help a bit.

In my reading of the booklet there are several key points that need to be made and they include:

  • The integrated approach proposed should be supported, but only if it truly means that all impacts on the given area are under review at the same time with all parties having something to gain or lose.  Recent land management plans and processes such as the Ghost Waiparous have been distorted in that the only thing under the microscope was our trail access.  It is time for that bias to end and for all users industrial, agricultural or recreational to be subject to the same process at the same table!
  • There are significant public lands in the white zone (agricultural lease) and no designation of riding areas and trails on these public lands. Providing places to ride responsibly could go a long way to reducing the problems created when residents of area communities have no options but trespassing and creating issues for leaseholders and SRD.
  • We should be advocates of Provincial oversight of public land access and use.  Alberta is becoming an urbanized society and when it comes to public lands this is not only a local issue.  It is our issue, our land and our resource and as taxpayers we deserve the best cost/benefit from it.
  • The booklet proclaims that there are over 520 parks and protected areas consuming over 4% of Alberta's land mass and a further 8% is taken up with National Parks.  With many more being advocated let us send the message that enough is enough Albertans deserve traditional recreational access to their public lands.  And with our resource based economy our standard of living is very much dependent upon a managed working environment not one that is hands off preserved.
  • In our favoured Green areas we have seen a significant loss of trails and access to parks, protected areas and more is threatened if radical environmental agendas are allowed to proceed.  We need to make vocal and clear that there should be no further loss of trails and that multi-use trails and traditional uses are part of our heritage and future.  Trails are an infrastructure asset to be treasured not reclaimed!  They are a major economic contributor to our economy and it is time they are recognized as such.
  • Our Government should immediately cease the sale of public lands to private interests.  These lands will have far more value to Albertans in the future as land availability becomes ever more important in the face of an increasing population. This land is crucial for wildlife and habitat preservation and recreational access.  Where ever public lands are leased to private interests there needs to be a review to ensure that the commercial value of these land rights are at market values.

I now come to what ticks me off, the Land-use Framework Workbook! (Available at above website)  This questionnaire is biased to protectionism and expansion of Government regulation.  Why would I say this - why haven't you heard the answer is in the question?   While it is easy to take issue with wording let me point out some major flaws.  These include:

  • Part II page 7 where the Issues and Challenges are set forth.  The options for response are all phrased "concerns".  This immediately biases the answers as if you feel an issue is being very well, or adequately handled your only response is to say "Not concerned at all" it is like saying I don't care but, we do care.  The obvious choices then reduced are "Somewhat concerned" or "Very concerned".  Without a crystal ball I can start to predict the headlines 90% or more of respondents are somewhat or very concerned by the issues. 
    • It appears a slam on hardworking public servants as the words imply that existing Government measures related to these issues and challenges are inadequate and not worth mention.
    •  Is this questionnaire bureaucratic word-bumbling, or is it a crafted agenda?  Take your choice!  A response that reflects a view that things are okay as is requires a "Not concerned at all" answer to most of these questions at a minimum.
  • The next aspect of this questionnaire that annoys me are "limits" as in greater Government intervention.  This starts early in Part III, but crescendos on page 6.  Here is the setup.  Nowhere does it define the array of existing "limits" and their adequacy nor does it provide the option for you to respond that existing legislation and regulations are adequate or even excessive.  No, it asks you "would you accept limits" on, recreation, residential and commercial development, energy development, agricultural development and forestry development all in a numerically ranked cascading sequence. 
    • But "limits" relative to what else, why of course the protectionist mother lode of "protected natural spaces", "watershed protection" and "habitat for fish and wildlife".  Odds are most any caring respondent will quickly check off "yes" for these mother lode items we must and do care don't we - wouldn't it be near heresy not to? 
    • But think about how it will be used. Reality is there are many long established "limits" to activities that impact the protectionist mother lode, ask your employers about regulations or read the tomes of regulation and legislation already on the Alberta books.  Without due thought, my off-the-cuff knee-jerk answer would have been a big hell yes to "limits" and they should be applied to everything, but wait aren't they already? 
    • Responding without due consideration takes the trap bait this Workbook elicits by its design.  I can predict the headline more clearly 90% or more of respondents are somewhat or very concerned by the issues and they are nearly unanimously in favour of limits on recreation and industry to provide for protected natural spaces, watersheds and habitat for fish and wildlife.  Once again to convey one is satisfied with the present status, or wants less rather than more limits you have to answer "No" to limits on everything. And even then the message falls short.

  

Perversion compounded?  Summarizing, you don't just have to say you don't care about major issues, but also no to limits on recreational or industrial activity and the protectionist mother lode.  This just to convey hold on there we have enough or more than enough already!

Does anyone suspect my headlines will be used to advance a radical protectionist environmental agenda?  Would you consider coupling this with ambitious bureaucrats craving for expanded regulation, bigger budgets and empires could have traction of itself to change Land-use?

But it doesn't end there, follow on page 7 with "When is placing limits on growth - Acceptable?  Unacceptable?"  Despite the complete failure to specify growth of what (aside from their aspiring interventions) one is left to presume they mean economic growth and your standard of living!  Ring the alarm bells if you are a thinking person working in any part of the economy directly or indirectly dependent upon resources and have a mortgage or a need to eat this might just lead to preservation of everything save you.

The crowning touch of bias and rush to intervention is proposed on page 9 where they go so far as to raise the spectre of added public intervention in matters of private land.  How best can they enforce, regulate, reward or in general morally coerce compliance with what they or special interests think best for your little plot of dirt.  We already have plenty of restrictions on what we can do with our private property and here comes an invite to sign up for more - any takers?

Read the booklet, generate your own view, feel free to use any points I raise.  But, if you really care about open processes and balance, focus on the Workbook, read it yourself, and form your own opinion before going to the meetings.  Don't let me con you!

The Workbook is where the real issues are lurking.  Word-smithing tilts responses to an agenda of more not less government intervention and a mandate for preservationists to push more public lands off limits to the public's access and interests.

Raise the questionnaire itself as well as your issues at the meetings in your area.  Let your feelings be known, stay rational, be passionate, respect others views and those organizing the meetings that allow your input.  This is our land make sure responses are not distorted or stolen by bungling word-jockeys or a sparsely hidden agenda.  The world is ruled by those that are prepared and show up.

My take, my opinion.

Barry Harper

 

 

Open-house public information sessions run May 14 to 31

Edmonton... Albertans will have an opportunity to provide feedback on the future of land use in Alberta at a series of open house-style public information sessions. Input can be provided through a workbook questionnaire at the sessions, online at www.landuse.gov.ab.ca, or by mail. For more information, call 310-4455 toll-free from anywhere in the province. The deadline for public input is June 15.

Session dates and locations:


 

Edson:

May 14, 2 - 9 p.m., Weyerhaeuser Room - Edson Recreation Complex
Wainwright:

 May 15, 2 - 9 p.m., Main Hall - Elks Hall
Peace River:

 May 15, 2 - 9 p.m., Ballroom - Sawridge Inn and Conference Centre
Lloydminster:

 May 16, 2 - 9 p.m., Crown Ballroom - Best Western Wayside Inn & Suites
Edmonton and Area:

 May 16, 2 - 9 p.m., Trade Centre - Rooms A, B & C, Mayfield Inn & Suites, and May 17, 2 - 9 p.m., Royal B Ballroom - Best Western Sherwood Hotel & Conference Centre, Sherwood Park
St. Paul:

 May 17, 2 - 9 p.m., Multi-purpose Room - St. Paul Recreation Centre, St. Paul Recreation & Exhibition Grounds
Grande Prairie:

 May 23, 2 - 9 p.m., Richmond Room, 2nd floor - Quality Hotel & Conference Centre
Slave Lake:

 May 23, 2 - 9 p.m., Large Ballroom (upstairs) - Sawridge Inn and Conference Centre
Fort McMurray:

 May 24, 2 - 9 p.m., Balsam Room - Sawridge Inn and Conference Centre
High Level:

 May 25, 2 - 9 p.m., Banquet Hall - Star Dust Motor Inn
Lethbridge:

 May 28, 2 - 9 p.m., Birch and Cedar Ballrooms - Lethbridge Lodge Hotel and Conference Centre
Medicine Hat:

 May 29, 2 - 9 p.m., Saamis C & D - Medicine Hat Lodge
Hanna:

 May 30, 2 - 9 p.m., Auditorium - Hanna Community Centre
Calgary and Area:

 May 30 & 31, 2 - 9 p.m., Trade Centre - Radisson Hotel Calgary Airport
Red Deer:

 May 31, 2 - 9 p.m., Monaco Board Room - Capri Centre Hotel, Trade and Convention Centre