Originally Posted by Kid Charlemagne
The issue isn't who thinks we should have access and why they think we should. The issue is that all citizens already have unfettered access to parks, and this company is interfering with that. It's a legal matter. As soon as you start asking groups like SAR to work outside of their mandate by applying irrelevant arguments that totally miss the point, you just waste a bunch of time and obfuscate the real issue. SAR is not a political entity, they simply fulfill their mandate to their tasking agencies when asked to do so. They have nothing to do with a private business restricting access to a provincial park.
I respect your opinion but I've already made the overture to them.
What you are saying is somewhat true but there is no conflict of interest in asking for input. They and other SAR groups give their opinions freely to the public and to private business on occasion regarding possible safety hazards and there is certainly no harm in being part of the equation. What are these irrelevant arguments, specifically, that you speak of? I'm trying to be inclusive, for one, and for two, they may very well decline to attend for whatever reason they cite, after all.
I'll be letting you know either way.