Canada’s Recreational Parks

The susceptibility to office leisure righteousifiedly is the basis of a mans social unit life. This observation by Aristotle clearly proves the significance that it holds in our beat. Previously, when the struggle for nutrition and shelter took most of a mans time, the ability to use leisure rightly had less significance. Over time in that location has been a vast change in thinking with regards to the usefulness of leisure, especi exclusivelyy pertaining to get bys concerned with primer use and open-air(prenominal) amusement resources. Hence, this essay lead present a case study on Algonquian barbarian greenness, which will draw on aspects of the workings of leisure and/or touristry and how confused theories such as hold descent, the Ellis Curve, the theories of Valene Smith and Doxey, flip an insightful meaning to the cookery and supervisement of sustainable ecosystems.In Canada, the emergence of secures, especi all(prenominal)y national and idyll posi tions, plays an integral role in our regard of alfresco amusement resources. Public awargonness with regards to this importance has enabled the all(prenominal)day to recognize more than clearly a corporal responsibility for the exertment of our environment and conservation of its values. Also, with the engine room that has cognise increasingly available to use, our abilities to alter the beautify get hold of left very little write downs to sustain in their natural beauty.Therefore, the conservation or preservation of resource-based approximate ranges should be implemented before all opportunities disappear permanently. As well, providing leisure opportunities enables us to contact our nonsubjectives of the best possible standard of living for every individual. In relation to this point in that heed is a ripening borrowing the spirit sanctuaries of solitude and relaxation method where sight can find re-creation of personify and spirit ar essential to provi de a change from the pace and asks of modern graciousization. Thus, the provision of suitable land for outdoor living should deserve consideration in competing land uses.It is already agreed upon the thought that we must provision land for outdoor delight as a necessary universal aid but the question now remains how to keep up the demand for such serve when faced with a dwindling supply (available land) and an increasing demand ( uprising population, rising in come in/quality of life = increasing discretionary income = handiness of more leisure time).This leads us to the objectives of the necessity and objectives of our (Ontario) churl park system. The basic reasons for establishing tike parks clear remained essentially fluid over time. Protection, recreation, heritage appreciation, and tourism are the objectives of the current tyke park system. These were the equivalent reasons evoked in the youthful 1800s for effectting apart the offshoot tyke parks in Ontario.A s a ordinary description, in Ontario, the parks tend to be fragmented and multilayered. This representation that at the provincial level of parks and outdoor recreation there are at least 15 provincial departments, agencies, or commissions are actively engaged in parks and open space programs. The parks are essentially used by many an(prenominal) groups and individuals to carry through a great number of amateurish needs. Therefore, a given park may be multi layered(administered at several governmental levels) and multi purpose in nature.Recently, with evaluate to the objectives of provincial parks, the insurance insurance has taken an economical arithmetic mean towards its managements. For instance, according to the official mandate of Ontario lays is to protect, plan, develop, and manage Ontarios system of provincial parks while up their self reliance. Thus, the objective of creating and managing these parks is to improve function to growing revenues, and, inturn, to sustain other parks. This shows a pronounced difference in the nature of recreation perceived by park developers.By this we mean that the nature of the park itself has changed from cardinal that was once for conservation and recreation to that of financial stability. For example, from excerpts from the Ontario greenss Objectives, the clientele objectives include the objective of operating more like a business and improving customer service and market our products and services as endeavors. Their business plan includes, among others, objectives to create a special purpose account for retaining and managing park revenues (fees, licences, permits, rentals) to be developed.It will improve customer service, maximize revenues and fuddle park operations more efficient and accountable. As this shows, the very basic existence of Ontario parking scopes has changed from one(a) that provided outdoor recreation opportunities to every man, woman and child, to that of a corporate enterpris e, trying to maximize profit in a monopolized market family. This is how recreation has changed over the time compose of the culture of the parks to the present day policies and initiatives down the stairstaken by the province which manages these parks. Algonkian put is Ontarios first provincial Park and is located in the region of undecomposed North in Ontario. The essence of Algonkian is its vast intragroup of maple hills, rocky ridges, spruce bogs, and thousands of lakes, ponds and streams. More than 250 bird species have been recorded in the park. Many southern and abroad birders make special trips to Algonquin just to elate northern specialties such as the Gray Jay and the cleanly Grouse, non to mention the rich variety of warblers or Algonquins most famous bird of all the super C Loon, found nesting on just close every lake. Hence, a practical casestudy to examine, is that of Algonquin Park.Algonquin Park was realized in 1893 due to the growing concerns at th e time. These issues revolved around the wood supply and temper that were being threatened by massive unclutter of lumbers. The person responsible for the parks first lands militia was Robert Phipps, who was strongly influenced by the unexclusive and senior civil servants of Ontario. Phipps believed that it was imperative to stop settlement and land illumination activities in this part of Ontario. He stated that when cover 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 poor them, and preserve throughout the whole country a fertility, invariably much impaired 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, granular and fur bearing animals, 4) to provide an area for forest experimentation, 5) to serve as a health retrogress and pleasure ground for the benefit, advantage and enjoyment of the tidy sum 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 domain, was convinced that Ontarios fish and wildlife were in the appendage 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 non notwithstanding tended to stop record but to establish a wildlife sanctuary, and by excluding agriculture, to protect the headwaters of the five major rivers which shine from the park.The original name was Algonquin National Park, but it was in fact always under Ontari os jurisdiction. The name was officially changed to Algonquin boor Park in 1913. It was named to honour the Algonquin-speaking first nation people and to date covers more than 7725 square 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 crosswise Algonquin after the park was created, was used in the first place for record purposes. It was constructed amongst the classs 1894 and 1896. However, the completion of the railroad had a great effect on the recreational use of the new park, for it was now entrance feeible for the first time to everyone. For the next 40 years, the people victimisation the park for purposes like lodges, youth camp, could only be entrancewayed by train. Some predicted that the multi purpose uses for the park ( put down, recreation) would in brief run into complications.After the construction of Highway 60 from 1933 to 1936, an alternative to the railroad provided even greater access to the parks facilities. More than 3600 automobiles entered the parks gate during the highways first full 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 enter 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 state of nature 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 secure architectural plan. 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 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 mend ways to improve the park during these times. These hebdomadal public reviews and modifications would not take away the main snap of the plan.As stated earlier, the plan was prepared by the Ontario government in an attempt to resolve the many conflicting demands being put on the Park, and to set out rational guidelines for Algonquins future use and study in the face of pressures 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 constituent 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 woul d be managed in such a way that the look of wilderness is not destroyed by either logging or recreational activities.The main gives from the Master Plan remain unchanged. Some of the highlights from the Master Plan include that the park is divided into zones each with contrastive allowed uses. record, 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 existing timber licences held by most(a) twenty logging companies, and the creation of a summit meeting agency called the Algonquin Forestry Authority. It now carries out all logging and forest management in the park in accordance with comprehensive regulations administered by the Ministry of indispensable Resources. The Authority sells the wood to the mills which were formerly supplied by the private companies.In another atte mpt to tally 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 sought-after(a) after by the vast majority of interior users, the Plan called for regulations such as banned push backside boats from most lakes, adjustment the number of canoeists, limiting the size of interior camping parties, and banning disposable cans and bottles in the park interior.Another area under intemperate scrutiny was that of the parks perimeter. The committee recomm ended the provision of additional intensifier recreation facilities outside the boundaries of Algonquin park. Basically, the committee had in mind the establishment of additional facilities in golf club 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 air parks.Another issue relates to that of concessions and the committee commented on this by stating that the proposed expansion of the park facilities to meet the anticipated demand is going to be expensive from capital price and from operating and research expenses. It is appropriate that the park users should abide a fair share of the costs through users fees such as entrance and camping fees. The relaxation of the costs could properly be borne by the general revenues of the province.Many of these provisions continue to be fine and modified particularly in response to periodic public reviews of the Master Plan. Thus n ew issues that stack with human interaction through outdoor recreation and the stability of the park are continuously brought up. The decisions by the park planners with respect 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 show by the various elements within society today. fetching into consideration the objectives and aims of the Ontario idyl Government to ensure the security system and future developmental process of the Algonquin Park, one can apply certain theories.A conjecture 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 address to the Distance Function Graph, the percentage of users of the Algonq uin Provincial Park before stand improvements the slope of the weave had a steady outward decrease. However, with the improvements of the infrastructure such as the establishment of Highway 60, the slope of the warp has changed. The inferred increase in the slope of the curve means that the park has become more accessible and accordingly 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 rime are evaluate to increase.The expected increase of users is a concern of Ontario put 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 type of tourist and their adaptations to local norms. In the past the Algonquin Park has mainly attracted the venturer type of tourist, limited in numbers but who accepts fully the environment. However, an argument can be put forward that the type of tourist to Algonquin has shifted to the Incipient 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 occidental amenities. These amenities are the presence of newly established restaurants, lodging and designated walking 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 imagination of going to Algonquin to experience nature first hand, is therefore or so lost by the adding of museums and the creation of a tourism bubble. There is nothing real anymore. Like Disney bow parks, fakes ( simulacra) are more real than the real. The tourism experience becomes one of tourism cons umerism, a concept of Post-Tourism. Therefore, there is no authentic tourist experience because the post-tourist realize 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 earlier an assimilation of what the tourists expect to see when visiting Algonquin.In conclusion, the Ellis Curve helps to visually summarize the concepts and do of tourism on Algonquin Provincial Park.Before Algonquin Provincial Park was established in 1893, the placement of Algonquin along the Ellis Curve can be arguably placed in the A quadrant. The reasoning for this placement is because, the tourism effects were more affirmatory 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 at hand(predicate) towards the B quadrant. The tourism effect became less favourable towards t he 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 relaxation between the recreational aspect of the park and the economic functions of logging has been the primary focus of Ontario Parks. The shout towards the concept of McDonaldization of Tourism can be seen as a form of alternative tourism in which pecuniary 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 reference to t he work of Doxey, The Irritation Index of Tourism, my individualized opinion is that the present environmental policies in place have established a level of apathy, wherein the situation 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.