Expect to pay more to use national parks

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,794
460
83
Expect to pay more to use national parks
Ottawa studies new ways to raise money, including fees on highways that cross parks

The federal government is hunting for more cash from Canada's national parks and historic sites, including potential new fees for some activities and services - such as fees for using public highways that cross major B.C. and Alberta parks.

Parks Canada hopes to identify new sources of revenue from retail, con-cessions, Internet activities, licensing/royalties, rentals, membership, public programs and other ventures, according to the summary of a new "revenue generation study" it is commissioning.

"Some of our locations can have lots of potential for that kind of revenue generation," said Ed Jager, director of visitor experience with Parks Canada. The agency responsible for 42 national parks, 167 national historic sites and three marine conservation areas is also hunting for new sources of contributions, such as individual and corporate donations, fundraising and annual giving.

Federal Environment Minister Peter Kent, who is in charge of Parks Canada, released a report in November that said the country's national parks and heritage sites are raking in billions of dollars for Canada's economy, with more than 80 per cent of the revenue coming from visitors.

He also announced most public user fees in parks and historic sites will remain frozen until April 2013. But Parks Canada, which only covers about 30 per cent of the costs of providing visitor services and facilities from fees, is looking for additional dollars to support its operations and enhance tourists' experiences.

The agency's request for private-sector submissions says the focus is on new opportunities to collect cash rather than increasing existing park user fees.

"The purpose of [the study] is to analyze Parks Canada's potential to generate increased net revenue from sources that are currently under-performing or are untapped," says the proposal for the study, which is expected to cost $50,000.

Existing or new facilities, services and products for which user fees do not now apply will also examined.

Of note, the work proposal identifies highways for which user fees are not charged for through traffic in national parks across Canada, including Banff, Jasper and Waterton Lakes, Alta.; and at Kootenay and Yoho in B.C. Jager said the study would likely consider the feasibility of charging user fees for through traffic "and what would be the implications from it."

The study is to be completed and delivered to the government by late March 2012.

Monica Andreeff, executive director of the Association for Mountain Parks Protection and Enjoyment, said her group opposes any measures that would compromise the ecological integrity of the parks. However, she applauds the agency for looking at new sources of revenue to improve visitors' enjoyment of the parks.

"They're struggling to fund what they do have now. Parks Canada actually needs an infusion of cash," Andreeff said Wednesday. "A lot of its infra-structure is suffering."

Moreover, many urbanites and new citizens are out of touch with the country's parks and historic sites, and the agency must look at new ways to attract visitors to "maintain the relevancy to Canadians," she said.

Expect to pay more to use national parks
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
547
113
Vernon, B.C.
Expect to pay more to use national parks
Ottawa studies new ways to raise money, including fees on highways that cross parks

The federal government is hunting for more cash from Canada's national parks and historic sites, including potential new fees for some activities and services - such as fees for using public highways that cross major B.C. and Alberta parks.

Expect to pay more to use national parks

User pay is a good philosophy, someone has to pay for the toilet paper etc. :smile:
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
547
113
Vernon, B.C.
They should be figuring out ways to leave money in the taxpayers pockets instead of more creative ways to grab it. "Tax and Spend Conservatives", didn't take long to steal that one from the Liberals.

Looks like you young whippersnappers don't like paying taxes any more than we old codgers do. :lol:
 

Cannuck

Time Out
Feb 2, 2006
30,245
99
48
Alberta
Looks like you young whippersnappers don't like paying taxes any more than we old codgers do. :lol:

I have no problem paying taxes. I just know how to set priorities. Right now, higher taxes are not an answer
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
547
113
Vernon, B.C.
Cannuck;1526138[B said:
]I have no problem paying taxes.[/B] I just know how to set priorities. Right now, higher taxes are not an answer

Your previous post indicates that you do! :smile:
 

Cannuck

Time Out
Feb 2, 2006
30,245
99
48
Alberta
The first sentence sets the tone of the post! You are starting to weave and bob again! :smile:

It is irrelevant what "sets the tone" of the post. What is relevant is what the post says. You are starting to weave and bob again.
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
Perhaps it would help you if you looked at the entire post instead of just taking one sentence out of it.


If only you practiced what you preached.
 

Cannuck

Time Out
Feb 2, 2006
30,245
99
48
Alberta
OK, so you've had a 180 degree change of heart since your first post! :smile:

Nope. You've had a 180 degree change in your understanding since my first post. Now that that is settled, can we move on and discuss the National Parks and the tax and spend Conservatives?
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
547
113
Vernon, B.C.
Nope. You've had a 180 degree change in your understanding since my first post. Now that that is settled, can we move on and discuss the National Parks and the tax and spend Conservatives?

It enhances one's credibility if he just admits he f&&ked up through stupidity and moves on!

Nope. You've had a 180 degree change in your understanding since my first post. Now that that is settled, can we move on and discuss the National Parks and the tax and spend Conservatives?

So where do you propose the funding comes from to pay for employees and supplies used in the Parks?
 

taxslave

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 25, 2008
36,362
4,340
113
Vancouver Island
Parks should pay their own way. The BC government did this in provincial parks for a few years but then in a bid to get leftard votes they did away with it. Since a huge number of tourists use all levels of parks user pay is appropriate otherwise taxpayers are just subsidizing the tourism businesses.

ANother tax saving measure would be to have all parks under one jurisdiction. Currently we have at least four levels of parks , all with their own bloated bureaucracy.
 

SLM

The Velvet Hammer
Mar 5, 2011
29,151
3
36
London, Ontario
ANother tax saving measure would be to have all parks under one jurisdiction. Currently we have at least four levels of parks , all with their own bloated bureaucracy.

That's the level of fat that needs to be first trimmed from all government agencies and departments, imho.