Frequently Asked QuestionsWhat is the Castle Special Place? It is a 1,041 km2 (402 mi2) area of public land in the Rocky Mountain Forest Reserve that the Alberta Government designated as a protected area under its Special Places 2000 Policy and Implementation Plan. It was nominated for protection by the public and reviewed by a government interdepartmental committee, and the provincial and local advisory committees prior to being designated March 1998. Today’s citizens’ initiative is proposing that protected area (except the 6 km2 held by Castle Mountain Resort Inc.), be legislated within the province’s current network of Protected Areas and Parks, as has been the case for the other Special Places. Where is the Castle Special Place? It’s in the southwest corner of Alberta, south of Crowsnest Pass and adjacent to Waterton Lakes National Park. The northern boundary is south of the Forest Reserve boundary and by public road is about 11 km south of Blairmore or 10 km south of Hillcrest. The east boundary is that of the Forest Reserve, located about 9 km west of Beaver Mines. It encompasses headwater tributaries of the Castle, Oldman and Waterton Rivers, but not the lands drained by the Crowsnest River. Thus, for example, it doesn’t include Tent Mountain and the Ptolemy, North & South York, and Byron Creek valleys. What are Citizens Initiatives for Protected Areas? They do the front-end work of establishing legislated protected areas and parks by reaching a consensus amongst user and interest groups on rough boundaries and the type of protected area(s) the site should be. The initiative prepares a conceptual proposal which is sent to the Tourism, Parks and Recreation Minister for government consideration. September 2007, the Minister announced he hoped to see such locally driven citizens’ initiatives from throughout the province. This was emphasized again with the government’s recent release its new Alberta’s Plan for Parks. What is the Castle Special Place Citizens’ Initiative & Working Group? User, interest and community groups, disposition holders, adjacent landholders, First Nations, businesses and municipal governments with an active interest in the Castle Special Place were all invited to form the initiative. Work kicked of with a June 2008 workshop in Pincher Creek. Participants in this citizens’ initiative were self-selected. They participated at the level of their choice, with the most time consuming level being the Working Group. All are businesses, residents or groups with members resident in the Livingstone-Macleod constituency or Lethbridge (Lethbridge residents are the largest user group of the Castle). This broad-based Working Group met every three to four weeks through the past year. It sought and shared information, drafted the principles and proposal for the Castle Special Place, and sought and incorporated feedback from the whole initiative and beyond. Meetings were run by an independent facilitator and decisions were reached through consensus. An open invitation for participation was communicated throughout the process. See www.castlespecialplace.ca for more information. How will the general public be involved? Tourism, Parks and Recreation undertakes public consultation on the proposal should the Minister decide to consider legislating the protected area. Once legislated, management planning is also done by the department through public consultation. How will those holding resource leases or rights be involved? They were invited to be part of the citizens’ initiative and some have been. Irrespective of that, Tourism, Parks and Recreation undertakes negotiations with each of the disposition holders should the Minister decide to consider legislating the protected area. How is this different from the previous Andy Russell – I’tai sah kóp proposal?
Questions about the Conceptual Proposal What’s proposed? It is proposed that present types of recreational uses, including hunting and fishing, and the summer grazing permits continue within the ecological limits of the Castle Special Place. (Oil and gas activities would continue in conjunction with the existing leases in accordance with the September 2003 agreement between the provincial departments responsible for energy and legislated protected areas.) More than 99 per cent of the Castle Special Place protected area is proposed as a Wildland. (An example is the Bob Creek Wildland in the Whaleback area west of Claresholm.) The remainder is the existing West Castle Wetlands Ecological Reserve and the five current Provincial Recreation Areas (PRAs). It’s proposed that Beaver Mines Lake, Castle Falls, Syncline and Lynx Creek PRAs be upgraded to provincial parks. Castle River Bridge remains as a PRA, the cross-country ski area is proposed as a PRA and it is proposed that these be linked with Syncline into one unit with a small provincial park along the river. These non-Wildland sites all total one per cent or 12 km2 (4.5 mi2). Why? There are a number of reasons (see principles at www.castlespecialplace.ca), which can be summarized as:
Why a legislated protected area? Wouldn’t more enforcement of the special management be enough? Although designated as a protected area, the Castle Special Place has yet to be legislated as one. That results in scant management and enforcement tools for protection and outdoor recreation, as well as no opportunity for neighboring communities to begin to share in the additional employment and economic activity annually generated by Alberta’s protected areas and parks. To achieve a protected area, it’s important to make use of the department with the authority, budget and tools designed for the job of protected areas (protected areas and parks legislation), instead of depending on limited tools (“special management” and Forest Land-Use) designed for different purposes with a department whose authority and budget is for sustainable resource development. Through the past 10 years, the Castle has been a “special management area” and is a Forest Land Use Zone (FLUZ) under the Forest Act. The purpose of the Forest Act is to provide for the sustained yield of timber. No legislation has come about defining or setting enforceable guidelines for “special management areas.” As explained on Sustainable Resource Development’s website, FLUZs aren’t designated protected areas. They are simply a tool used to allocate areas or trails as being either open or closed to off-road recreation. FLUZs have no bearing on any other uses, including industrial or commercial development. Why not legislated before? There were three key reasons:
area at that time.
Will there still be fishing, hunting & horseback riding? Yes Fish and wildlife management, including licensing, remains with the Alberta Fish and Wildlife Division. Unlike national parks, Wildlands are open to hunting and you don’t need a separate fishing license. Wildlands, Provincial Parks and Provincial Recreation Areas provide for a variety of outdoor recreation, including outfitting and horseback riding. Will there still be roads and camping? Yes Public roads, staging areas and campgrounds will continue. All five campgrounds and group camps (Provincial Recreation Areas with 235 sites in total) are already under Tourism, Parks and Recreation. In order to protect the watershed and wildlife habitat, reduce the fire hazard and equitably share the area, it is recommended that environmentally appropriate locations be designated for organized, vehicle-accessed random camping, and that the existing campgrounds be improved to reduce the pressure for random camping. Camp-anywhere-you-choose and camping for more than 14 days would be phased out. Will there still be OHVs & snowmobile trails? Yes Designated routes are allowed in Wildlands and Provincial Recreation Areas. In 2004, Alberta Sustainable Resource Development committed to reviewing the Castle motorized access management plan. That review would be rolled into the public consultations on the management plan for the proposed legislated protected areas. Will entrance still be free? Yes Entrance fees are only charged for national parks and some historic sites. Who will pay for looking after it? It comes out of the provincial budget, not the municipal. Current provincial expenditures for managing resource development would shift to wildland protection, including watershed, wildlife habitat, outdoor recreation and heritage appreciation. The provincial budget receives an estimated $461 million annually in tax revenue from the economic activity generated by public and visitor use of provincial protected areas and parks. SRD will continue to be responsible for management of the summer grazing permits, fish and wildlife. The rest would be the responsibility of Tourism, Parks and Recreation. This is supplemented by stewardship groups and volunteers. What about grazing, Shell & Castle Mountain Resort? Establishment of what’s proposed for the Castle provides for the continuation of the summer grazing permits, and oil and gas activities associated with existing petroleum leases, such as the Shell Waterton Gas Field that overlaps the eastern side. It is up to Castle Mountain Resort if they would like to be one of the various types of protected areas and parks, as per some other resorts such as Kananaskis Village & Nakiska in Evans Thomas Provincial Recreation Area or Canmore Nordic Centre Provincial Park. It’s nationally significant & was in the national park. Why not propose a national park?
|