Volunteer groups are OK if they are on the right page. But do you really want the North Shore Mudders putting a new route into Garibaldi lake?

ouch?!

what's a mudder...horse or machine?

I have long thought that a volunteer program "Friends of Garibaldi Park", or "Friends of Yoho" was a great idea. I used to give evening talks on the geology of the Garibaldi Lake area at the Battleship Islands campground- they were always extremely well received!

I am sure there are a lot of "friends" of the parks that would be more than happy to volunteer their services to further an understanding of a Park's natural history. I know this used to be done by paid Park's staff- but if that's no longer feasible, then why not promote more volunteerism?

Mudding is the 'sport' of 4x4 driving though a wet area.
See for example:
http://www.muddertruckers.ca/

No thanks, I'll skip the link, I get the idea all too painfully having seen natural grassland turned into oval race tracks and cloverfields decimated by thousand-dollar tires.
And the Environment Ministry claims that no laws are broken when meadow larks & snakes loose their environment[B)]

But that is too simplistic. The parks do not generate enough money to be self supportive.
Most people including those on this forum who use the parks are generally against any activity that produces more revenues... So your solution of taxpayer funded has merit but those of a differant opinion say not at the expense health care , pensions , social programs and even jobs. I am not saying your wrong just that has to be more than just paid for by taxpayers
becuase our opinion of the national parks is not the same as many other Canadians.
Always like to hear peoples solutions tp parks funding... yes more money but then the question is what is the money to be used for...and then we disagree on that as well..
a complex issue indeed..

Are you sure about that? I would have thought that the Parks were at least self-supporting. 10 million visitors @ $9.80 per day, plus revenues from backcountry permits and a cut of the money from the commercial businesses along the Parkway (like the Icefields snowcoaches).

It was my understanding that extra revenue was being siphoned off by the various levels of government. Could you please provide a source for that?

Even if that was the case, I have to agree with John. The national parks are both a Canadian and an international resource, which we should as a country be supporting regardless of the cost.

Parks Canada still spends around $500 million to keep our national parks up and running. The trouble is that it only receives about 30 per cent of its budget from those who visit and do business in our national parks. In essence, the government is subsidizing the existence of our national parks.

Now don't ge me wrong i am with you on this but we need to come up with some ideas...

Again, do you have a source for your numbers? What revenues are included, and which aren't? I suspect Parks doesn't want us to know how much of a kickback they get from Brewsters, and I wonder how much the ski hills are paying to lease land.

And what does that cost include? If it covers things like infrastructure in Jasper and Banff, then those would be paid by the tax base, not from Park revenues. And maintenance of highways, including the Parkway, should be covered by transport budgets since they are not specifically park costs.

You can cook the books a lot of ways if you're a good accountant.

But regardless, just think about it. If there isn't enough money to pay all the park expenses, is it worth creating atrocities like Viad's Discovery Walk to get there? Should there be ticket booths at the parking lots for every scenic attraction?

Either the Parks have an intrinsic value to Canada and as a World Heritage Site, and to the Canadians who pay for them, or they're just a Disneyland to be sold off piece by piece.

Who here is smarter than Jim Flaherty? Can you balance the budget? Here's your chance:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...rticle2371543/


First I managed to balance it by cheating and stealing $50+ billion from E.I. which made me look like a genius...

Then I balanced it by not cheating but only by raising the GST back to where it was....naturally that ended my short career in politics though :-)

I would increase the corporate tax rates, and not by 1%. We have a lot of money that is sitting in corporate treasuries, doing nothing. Nothing. The big lie of "trickle down" is that those big tax cuts would do something. We were supposed to rocket to full employment as businesses would suddenly have all this money to invest.

There is a lot of theory in business that full (~3-4%) unemployment is counterproductive. Why? Because it means labour has too much leverage. The idea is that an unemployment rate of 9% is "ideal" in that it keeps workers fearful of changing jobs or asking for more money.

But, what is good for people? Low unemployment. We have also been fed this line that "what is good for business is good for people." Wrong. Our goals and ideals are often at odds.

All good points, unfortunately the game only provides options that are currently being debated. I was thinking the same thing, corporate tax hike of 2% would change the scope quite a bit.

I 100 Per cent agree with you on this !
Although I would like input on how more money is used..
My priorites would include trail maintenance..
Again though many people don't see the Parks having an intrinsic value to Canada ...
There needs to be a big push in that area...

[quote]quote:Originally posted by McLeod99

[quote]quote:Originally posted by peter1955

[quote]Originally posted by McLeod99

Harper spent almost that much invading Libya. I don't think preserving the environment ranks very high on his list of spending priorities.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/stor...e.html?cmp=rss

yeah, don't need F-35s. Some solid deep cold far ranging search & rescue and delivery vessels[ air & water] would be a better investment.Veterans need more access to psychologists and psychiatrists post trauma syndrome-mental health.
Schools are getting less & today I read that 5-more 'noneducational days' will be added to the new school year, on-top of the many existing pro-D-days and longer spring breaks.
Health care. Inadequate staffing fluctuations.Restricted times of leaves.
Duty Counsel and Legal Aide.
A lot of canadian life is connected & plugged into one another one way or another and many have merits to funding.
Trim the fat is all I seem to hear each year,& some parks need to be sheltered from effects of extreme underfunding. & Other parks may benefit from the absence of intense pressure and revert to greater wildlife again.
Hard to say where on the list some cuts should be imposed.Then again, cuts need to heal and receive renewed fundings.
Did 'occupy' have anything to say about 'cuts'?