British Columbia has the best that nature has to offer: mountains, oceans, forests, rainforests, dessert and countless diverse islands and wildlife. With such natural beauty it is no wonder that BC enjoys visitors from around the world. The province has 600 parks comprising over 13 million hectares of land. But, facilities are limited, park maintenance requires funding and resources are always limited.

The provincial government has developed a policy that will allow a very limited number of private lodging facilities to operate within provincial park boundaries. Private operators will have to pay park permit fees, taxes and all revenue will stay within the park system. The net result: better facilities, increased accommodations, enhanced accessibility for visitors and it's not out of the taxpayers' pocket. It's a win-win.

But opposition to the proposal is growing from so-called environmentalists. After criticizing the provincial government for not spending more on BC Parks, environmentalists are rebuking the notion that such revenue could come from private operators instead of taxpayers.

The Western Canadian Wilderness Society has already issued its warning, "it is time to put developers on notice. Should bids be accepted to develop in parks, we will take a targeted message to the marketplace against these new operations to ensure they stay out of -provincial parks." But who would the Society allow into the parks Apparently only those survivalists that can live naturally off the land for days on end; not your average citizen or family.

When did the wilderness become the exclusive domain of expert naturalists Parks are to be enjoyed by everyone and the government's proposal for lodging in 12 high-use areas makes sense for communities, the economy and yes, even the environment.
The notion of that any human interaction with wilderness is harmful or that nature is to be seen but not enjoyed is an overzealous, archaic and unsustainable approach to environmental management.

When did lodging become an eco-system disaster The resort at Lake Louise or Banff National Park are not only world renowned but also provide information, interpretation and shelter for those that visiting. If shelter wasn't there, how many visitors would know and appreciate the beauty of our national parks

It's time to put down the gauntlets of extreme protectionism and embrace the benefits that everyone can reap from our natural landscape.

The provincial government will still maintain ownership of the proposed development areas and private operators will have to meet stringent requirements and pay for park permits.

Contrary to what the Wilderness Committee believes, that parks are "for the sole purpose of preserving natural areas," our parks are to be enjoyed for recreational and, educational purposes. The irony of the protectionists is that while they hold that parks are sacred public trusts, they oppose the general public's use of them. Taxpayers should pay for their upkeep but should not be able to enjoy them.

The government's proposal makes sense for the public and for our parks and should be lauded as a policy that balances nature and public use.