Hello,

Recently, many of you will have become aware of a proposal from John Baldwin that the Waddington / Whitemantle / Homathko Icefield regions of the Coast Mountains be designated as a non-motorized recreation zone, with consideration for eventual park status.  It is easy for a keen outdoorsperson to reflexively say “yes” to such a proposal, but the matter is more complicated than it seems, and there are consequences to be considered, and avoided. I disagree with this proposal, and I’m going to tell you why.

I have made a couple dozen trips into, and passed well over two hundred days amongst, these awesome mountains, in winter, spring, summer, and fall.  I share John’s love for these areas. Like him, I resonate with their beauty, and I cherish their challenges and the rewards that wilderness activities provide.  The remoteness, the wildness, and the loneliness of the Waddington Range, in particular, is remarkable and unique.

John feels these qualities are under threat, and to some extent I agree.  There is a current application for a heli-skiing tenure that would include portions of this area, and heli-skiing does not make a good neighbour for self-propelled wilderness recreation.  The noise is disruptive, and the use of the slopes reduces the pleasure of others who follow, especially those who have ‘earned their turns’.  John also raises the spectre of potential snowmobiling incursions and others activities like dog sledding, but these remain vague possibilities for the moment. In any case, the proposed solution – establishment of a blanket non-motorized zone and eventual park status – will destroy one of the other key qualities of the Coast Mountains, the freedom to go where you want, when you want, how you want, with whom you want, without restrictions or bureaucratic impediments.

That freedom is worth defending.  Once the heli-skiers are gone, the mountains revert to emptiness; once freedom is gone, it is never restored.  The areas in question would go from being accessible to all, anywhere and at any time, to being regulated and restricted.  And – be very clear - those restrictions would be put in place not by our recreation community, but by bureaucrats, with priorities and pressures and perspectives vastly different than those of the outdoor community.  And the rules would change, subject to political whim and economic currents. We would have influence and input, but we would not have control. The only rule which protects the wonderful ‘freedom of the hills’ in the Waddington Range for the long term is no rules at all!  Restricted access is not a desirable outcome.  That gives up too much, for too little.  

It is a good thing for wilderness recreation advocates to object to proposals for heli-skiing in the Waddington Range, or other specific disruptive activities (snowmobiling, for instance).  Past experience shows that these objections are taken seriously by land managers, on a case-by-case basis, as they arise.  

But past experience, and the response to the current challenge, also provides warnings.  An Alpine Club of Canada Vancouver Section proposal from 1989 would have restricted air access to only a few sites. The Federation of Mountain Clubs of BC Rec and Con committee response to a heli-skiing tenure application in 2007-8-9 would have banned aerial daytrips into the Range, year round. The currently proposed non-motorized zone also includes a similar ban on aerial day access. 

Why?  If we can fly in for a week, why should someone else not be permitted to fly in for an hour? In what way are ‘we’ more worthy than ‘they’?  This is a difference of degree, not of kind.  Such a restriction, if applied to the whole area proposed by John Baldwin, would have prevented Phyllis Munday, the famous early explorer of the Range, late in her life, from enjoying a lunch in the middle of the Homathko Icefields before doing a flight-seeing trip around Waddington. Why?  There is no conflicting use in the summer, so why apply restrictions in that season?  There is minimal disruption caused by a day-trippers, so why exclude them?  They are mountain-lovers, just like us.

The warning extends to the role of organizations like the ACC, the FMCBC, and the BC Mountaineering Club.  They exist primarily to encourage, promote, and protect the recreational activities of their members.  Yet they find themselves inviting restriction not just upon ‘others’, but on their own members.  This is not just the wrong solution to the problem. This is Orwellian!

I propose instead a vigorous maintenance of both self-interest and of freedom, tempered by self-awareness and tolerance.  By all means, object to applications for heli-ski tenures in the Waddington Range. I support that, and have participated energetically in the past. Beyond that, I take issue.

Be mindful enough to realize that our precious wilderness experiences are only possible thru the application of technologies that we wish to restrict others with different interests from using, which is an incongruous philosophical position. And keep in mind that ‘civilization’, in the form of better clothing, equipment, and apparatus - not to mention the radios and EPIRBs and avvy beacons that no current party travels without - ironically makes the ‘wilderness’ experience more accessible, enjoyable, and safe. The ‘wilderness’ that we experience is an illusion, or perhaps even a delusion. We literally ‘live the dream’, but that in no way makes it less impactful or precious.

So, my urgings are these:  Defend the interests of the wilderness community, but in moderation.  Maintain freedom, above all other qualities.  React to actual, direct conflicts, not hypothetical threats. Exclude heli-skiing; ignore chimeras. Ask for the most minimal restrictions on others that are congruent with ‘our’ interests.  Expect to compromise. Resist bureaucracy.  Confront rule-makers.  Tolerate and share.  No parks.  

If, upon reflection, you agree, I urge you to sign this online petition in support of Free Waddington.

Enjoy, and stay safe out there.

Don Serl

If you care enough, take the extra step and send a brief message directly to the people who make the decisions.  Tell them you want heli-skiing excluded from the Waddington Range and its neighbouring slopes, but that you support other forms of recreational access, without restrictions, including all forms of air access, in any place, at any time, for any duration.  Mention your concerns that ‘protective’ land designations of any sort almost certainly will lead to access restrictions, not consistent with the above position. Say something nice about the Range, the adventures that it offers, and the freedom to be experienced within its boundaries.  Future generations will thank you.

Those decision makers include:

John Horgan, M.L.A.

Premier of British Columbia

premier@gov.bc.ca

 

George Heyman

Minister of the Environment and Climate Change Strategy BC

katrineconroy.MLA@leg.bc.ca

 

Katrine Conroy

Minister of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development

Doug.Donaldson.MLA@leg.bc.ca

 

Vera Vukelich

Manager Land Policy and Programs

Vera.Vukelich@gov.bc.ca

 

Justin Trudeau, MP

Prime Minister of Canada

justin.trudeau@parl.gc.ca

 

Steven Guilbeault

Minister of Environment and Climate Change

Steven.Guilbeault@parl.gc.ca

 

BC Mountaineering Club

exec@bcmc.ca

 

Alpine Club of Canada Vancouver Section

info@accvancouver.ca

 

Federation of Mountain Clubs of BC

info@mountainclubs.org