Commercialization trumps ‘wilderness in perpetuity’

Over 100 years ago, the need was felt to preserve large parts of Canada as pristine wilderness, to be enjoyed by Canadians and others in perpetuity.

When did we shift from the original “wilderness in perpetuity” concept to the present gaudy development and commercialization concept?

Forty years ago, I worked in Parks Canada policy division in Ottawa. Every once in a while the same question came up: “What is it worth to a National Park visitor to look out over a vast view, as far as the horizon, where nothing has been disturbed by humans, or ever would be?”

Back then it was a somewhat rhetorical question, as the keepers of the parks, the superintendents, biologists and wardens were steeped in non-development in the National Parks.

What made it all worthwhile to the visitor was to know that, though he or she had visited the park once only, the vast view could be revisited through the mind’s eye, and through photographs. Just knowing it was still there, undisturbed, gave peace of mind and spirit.

Everything was sacrosanct. Obviously visitors could not hunt and kill the mammals and birds, or even plants. A visitor was not even allowed to catch and keep a few insects and spiders without special permits. If permits were issued, then I, for example, would have to do identifications of what I caught, and then ensure that the specimens were deposited in an approved museum. All that seems to have gone by the by today. Commercialization seems to be the thing.

In thinking about it, I might even allow commercialization if any and all profits from it were poured back into maintenance of wilderness areas in perpetuity, rather than into the pockets of developers and stockholders. Thus, any developers in National Parks must see that the National Parks wilderness areas profit, and not the developers themselves.

Robin Leech, P. Biol., Edmonton