Canada’s Recreational Parks

The capacity to using up leisure right is the bottom of a mans whole life. This observation by Aristotle clearly proves the signifi potentiometerce that it holds in our snip. Previously, when the struggle for food and shelter took most of a mans time, the ability to use leisure rightly had little signifi endce. Over time in that location has been a vast change in thinking with regards to the usefulness of leisure, especi aloney pertaining to issues bear on with background use and outdoor deflection resources. Hence, this essay leave alone lay out a case study on Algonkian boor Park, which will draw on facial expressions of the workings of leisure and/or tourism and how various theories much(prenominal) as exceed Decay, the Ellis Curve, the theories of Valene Smith and Doxey, give an insightful subject matter to the planning and management of sustainable ecosystems.In Canada, the emergence of pose, especially internal and provincial special Ks, rounds an integral character in our consideration of outdoor merriment resources. Public aw atomic number 18ness with regards to this importance has enabled the public to recognize to a greater extent than clearly a collective responsibility for the management of our environment and preservation of its values. Also, with the applied science that has become increasingly available to use, our abilities to alter the landscape keep left(a) very little lands to wield in their natural beauty.Therefore, the conservation or preservation of resource-based jets should be utilizeed onward all opportunities vaporize permanently. As well, providing leisure opportunities enables us to fulfill our objectives of the best possible pattern of living for every individual. In relation to this point thither is a growing acceptance the constitution sanctuaries of solitude and repose where people can find re- universe of body and spirit ar essential to propose a change from the pace and demands of modern ci vilization. thus, the furnish of suitable land for outdoor living should de practice consideration in competing land uses.It is already agreed upon the notion that we must provision land for outdoor pleasure as a necessary public service exactly the oppugn now remains how to maintain the demand for such services when approach with a dwindling bestow (available land) and an increasing demand (rising population, rising income/ prime(prenominal) of life = increasing discretionary income = availability of more leisure time).This leads us to the objectives of the necessity and objectives of our (Ontario) provincial putting surface system. The raw material reasons for instituteing provincial parklands have remained essentially fluid over time. Protection, recreation, heritage appreciation, and tourism atomic number 18 the objectives of the latest provincial park system. These were the homogeneous reasons evoked in the late 1800s for position aside the stolon provincial par ks in Ontario.As a general description, in Ontario, the parks tend to be fragmented and multilayered. This mover that at the provincial level of parks and outdoor recreation there atomic number 18 at least 15 provincial departments, agencies, or commissions are actively engaged in parks and open space programs. The parks are essentially used by many groups and individuals to satisfy a great number of amateur needs. Therefore, a given park whitethorn be multi layered(administered at several regimeal levels) and multi purpose in constitution.Recently, with regard as to the objectives of provincial parks, the policy has taken an sparing outlook towards its managements. For instance, according to the prescribed mandate of Ontario lay is to cherish, plan, develop, and manage Ontarios system of provincial parks musical composition improving their self reliance. Thus, the objective of creating and managing these parks is to improve services to sum up revenues, and, inturn, to sus tain other parks. This shows a marked difference in the nature of recreation perceived by park developers.By this we mean that the nature of the park itself has changed from one that was once for conservation and recreation to that of financial stability. For example, from excerpts from the Ontario Parks Objectives, the business objectives include the objective of operating more like a business and improving customer service and market our products and services as goals. Their business plan includes, among others, objectives to create a special purpose bank bill for retaining and managing park revenues (fees, licences, permits, rentals) to be developed.It will improve customer service, maximize revenues and tell on park operations more efficient and accountable. As this shows, the very basic existence of Ontario Parks has changed from one that provided outdoor recreation opportunities to every man, cleaning lady and child, to that of a corporate enterprise, trying to maximize prof it in a monopolized marketplace. This is how recreation has changed over the time frame of the development of the parks to the chip in day policies and initiatives undertaken by the duty which manages these parks.Algonquian Park is Ontarios first gear Provincial Park and is located in the region of Near North in Ontario. The heart of Algonquian is its vast Interior of maple hills, rocky ridges, spruce bogs, and thousands of lakes, ponds and streams. More than 250 fizzle species have been recorded in the park. Many southern and overseas birders recognize special trips to Algonkian just to charm northern specialties such as the Gray Jay and the Spruce Grouse, not to mention the rich variety of warblers or Algonquins most famous bird of all the Common Loon, found nesting on just near every lake. Hence, a practical casestudy to examine, is that of Algonquin Park.Algonquin Park was established in 1893 due to the growing concerns at the time. These issues revolve around the woo d supply and climate that were being threatened by massive clearing of forests. The person responsible for the parks first lands reserves was Robert Phipps, who was strongly influenced by the public and senior civil servants of Ontario. Phipps believed that it was imperative to apprehend settlement and land clearing activities in this part of Ontario. He say that when covered with extensive woods the principal heights of land forms reservoirs which supply the sources of numerous rivers, give moisture to the numerous small lakes and watercoursesbe utter them, and preserve throughout the whole country a fertility, invariably much afflicted when the forests are removed.Robert Phipps enlisted the help of Alexander Kirkwood, who advised a commission that the objectives of establishing the first provincial park should be to 1)preserve the headwaters of the park river systems, 2) to preserve the native forests, 3) to protect birds, fish, game and fur bearing animals, 4) to provide an are a for forest experimentation, 5) to serve as a health resort and pleasure ground for the benefit, receipts and enjoyment of the people of the province.As well, the chairman of the Royal Commission on Game and Fish, that the provincial government had been forced to set up, by the public, was positive(p) that Ontarios fish and wildlife were in the process of being eliminated. Therefore it was recommended the formation of a provincial game park as the best means of restocking the province with wildlife should be created. These powerful influences ensured that the park would be created and maintained.Therefore, by establishing the park in 1893, it not only tended to stop enter but to establish a wildlife sanctuary, and by excluding agriculture, to protect the headwaters of the five major rivers which flow from the park.The superior address was Algonquin National Park, but it was in fact of all time under Ontarios jurisdiction. The name was officially changed to Algonquin Provincial Park in 1913. It was named to honour the Algonquin-speaking first nation people and to date covers more than 7725 agora kilometres of forest, lakes, and rivers.As the park has changed and evolved since its creation, so to have the policies concerning Algonquin. The construction of the railroad line crosswise Algonquin after the park was created, was used primarily for record purposes. It was constructed amid the years 1894 and 1896. However, the completion of the railway had a great effect on the recreational use of the new park, for it was now accessible for the first time to everyone. For the next 40 years, the people using the park for purposes like lodges, youth camp, could only be accessed by train. Some predicted that the multi purpose uses for the park (logging, recreation) would curtly run into complications.After the construction of Highway 60 from 1933 to 1936, an substitute to the railroad provided even greater access to the parks facilities. More than 3600 automo biles entered the parks gate during the highways first wide-cut year of operation, and soon campgrounds had been established at popular sites. At the same time, this more convenient means of access to Algonquin made the demise of the railroad just a question of time. The increasing conflict between logging and recreation finally came true the late 1960s were a time of great public controversy and debate about the role of logging in Algonquin. Most believed that the logging was unacceptable with the wild park they wanted.This lead to the Algonquin Park Committee designed to present and implement official policy guidelines with regards to the management of Algonquin provincial park. The report created was called the Algonquin tame final cause. It addressed the contemporary issues/problems that were facing the park and the solutions recommended by park planners to rectify the situation. The Algonquin Park Master architectural plan was released by the Ontario government in 1974. It was also decided to review the effectiveness of this plans policy every five years and to suggest better ways to improve the park during these times. These periodic public reviews and modifications would not take away the main focus on of the plan.As stated earlier, the plan was prepared by the Ontario government in an attempt to resolve the many conflicting demands being placed on the Park, and to set out rational guidelines for Algonquins future use and development in the face of impels that can only become stronger in the years to come. The Master Plans official goal for Algonquin is to provided continuing opportunities for a diversity of low intensity recreational experiences, within the constraint of the contribution of the Park to the economic life of the region. What this essentially implied is that logging would continue to operate within the parks boundaries, but that it would be managed in such a way that the feel of wilderness is not destroyed by either logging or re creational activities.The main features from the Master Plan remain unchanged. Some of the highlights from the Master Plan include that the park is divided into zones each with different allowed uses. Logging, for example, is permitted only in the recreation-utilization, or about 57% of the parks total area. Other zones include wilderness zones, development zones, nature reserve zones, and historical zones.Another feature of the Plan was the cancellation of the breathing timber licences held by some twenty logging companies, and the creation of a Crown agency called the Algonquin Forestry Authority. It now carries out all logging and forest management in the park in symmetry with comprehensive regulations administered by the Ministry of Natural Resources. The Authority sells the wood to the mills which were once supplied by the private companies.In another attempt to control the logging practices of the forest, the provincial government has created a planning process called Lands for Life which states that logging companies will manage our public land and will have rights to it for up to 100 years at a time. Logging companies have openly stated that they do not want any new protected areas to come out of Lands for Life and they want to log in existing parks like Algonquin.The third area where the Plan introduced far-reaching changes was that of recreation in the park interior. In an effort to preserve those qualitites shown by studies and questionnaires to be want after by the vast majority of interior users, the Plan called for regulations such as banned motor boats from most lakes, constrictive the number of canoeists, limiting the size of interior camping parties, and banning disposable cans and bottles in the park interior.Another area under intense scrutiny was that of the parks perimeter. The committee recommended the provision of additional intensive recreation facilities outside the boundaries of Algonquin park. Basically, the committee had in mi nd the establishment of additional facilities in order to takes some of the pressure off Algonquin. The park, in their terms, had reached its carrying capacity due to overuse. The natural solution is to establish satellite parks.Another issue relates to that of concessions and the committee commented on this by stating that the proposed enlargement of the park facilities to meet the anticipated demand is going to be dear(predicate) from capital cost and from operating and research expenses. It is appropriate that the park users should hold a fair share of the costs through users fees such as entrance and camping fees. The balance of the costs could properly be borne by the general revenues of the province.Many of these provisions continue to be refined and special particularly in response to periodic public reviews of the Master Plan. Thus new issues that hatch with human interaction through outdoor recreation and the stability of the park are continuously brought up. The decis ions by the park planners with compliancy to the issues facing the park could not have all been foreseen. They believe that the park, though growing and facing new changes with respect to its needs for outdoor recreation, serves its original purpose as well as many of the interests currently are being expressed by the various elements within society today. fetching into consideration the objectives and aims of the Ontario Provincial Government to ensure the protection and future developmental process of the Algonquin Park, one can apply certain theories.A theory which applies to the Algonquin Provincial Park is the issue of Distance Decay. Distance Decay states the further away a place is from a community, there will be a significantly lower the number of visitors.With credit to the Distance Function Graph, the percentage of users of the Algonquin Provincial Park before nucleotide improvements the slope of the curve had a tranquillize outward decrease. However, with the improvem ents of the infrastructure such as the establishment of Highway 60, the slope of the curve has changed. The inferred growth in the slope of the curve means that the park has become more accessible and hence an increase in the number of visitors. In 1997, more than 8.5 million people enjoyed provincial parks and as many as 2,400 people attended public wolf howling sessions in Algonquin in a day. And with the further improvements of the park, these numbers are expect to increase.The expected increase of users is a concern of Ontario Parks hence a limitation of visitors was established. The Distance Decay function, however, is tied to the theory of Valene Smith, Hosts and Guests, 1977. Smith classifies the compositors case of touring car and their adaptations to local norms. In the past the Algonquin Park has mainly attracted the adventurer type of tourist, limited in numbers but who accepts fully the environment. However, an argument can be put forward that the type of tourist t o Algonquin has shifted to the early Mass type tourist. Reasoning for this classification is because there is now a steady flow of tourist to the park, but mainly because the tourists now seek horse opera amenities. These amenities are the presence of newly established restaurants, lodging and designated walk trails.The Algonquin Park, in some sense, is moving towards a McDonalization of Tourism, in which vacations are controlled as to the number of people allowed into the park and predictable with respect to the areas visitors are allowed to visit. The natural model of going to Algonquin to experience nature first hand, is therefore somewhat lost by the adding of museums and the creation of a tourism bubble. There is nothing real anymore. Like Disney theme parks, fakes ( simulacra) are more real than the real. The tourism experience becomes one of tourism consumerism, a concept of Post-Tourism. Therefore, there is no authentic tourist experience because the post-tourist realiz e that they are play a game. The experience of going to Algonquin to watch the birds or to see the wolves is in a controlled atmosphere it is not the real thing but instead an assimilation of what the tourists expect to see when visiting Algonquin.In conclusion, the Ellis Curve helps to visually tot the concepts and effects of tourism on Algonquin Provincial Park.Before Algonquin Provincial Park was established in 1893, the stead of Algonquin along the Ellis Curve can be arguably placed in the A quadrant. The reasoning for this lieu is because, the tourism effects were more favourable to the environment more Explorer type tourist- and to the economy, wherein there was the presence of private logging companies.After 1893, the placement of Algonquin was now closer towards the B quadrant. The tourism effect became less favourable towards the environment and more favourable for the economy. The improved infrastructure created an increase in users, a shift in the type of tourist incipient Mass and an increase presence of logging companies, all of which placed concerns about the carrying capacity of Algonquin Park.However, through the new objectives of the Provincial Government in levying user fees of campgrounds, the consolidation of logging under Crown supervision to deal with the issue of the carrying capacity, the placement of Algonquin could be placed back in Quadrant A.Striking a balance between the recreational aspect of the park and the economic functions of logging has been the primary focus of Ontario Parks. The step towards the concept of McDonaldization of Tourism can be seen as a form of alternative tourism in which monetary concerns to fund educational programs and the preservation of the ecosystem by limiting human impact, is seen as the better of the two evils.Finally, with drawn summon to the work of Doxey, The Irritation Index of Tourism, my personal opinion is that the present environmental policies in place have established a level of apathy, wherein the strength of tourist (the public) and host (park operators) is a moderate acceptance and support of tourism and is a positive step towards fulfilling the capacity to use leisure rightly as the basis of mans whole life.