University of Manitoba
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
LAND LEASING DEBATE IN JASPER AND BANFF NATIONAL PARKS: A CASE STUDY ON PRESSURE GROUP BEHAVIOUR By JOSTPH GARCEA A thesi s submi tted i n parti a'l ful f j I lment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of Pol'itical Studies, University of Manitoba JUNE, 1982 LAND LEASING DEBATE IN JASPER AND BANFF NATIONAL PARKS: A CASE STUDY ON PRESSURE GROUP BEHAVIOUR BY JOSEPH GARCEA A thesis submitted to fhe Faculty of craduate studies of the university of Manitoba in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of MASTER OF ARTS o 1982 Pernrission has been gra'ted to the LIBRAR.Y oF THE UNIVER- SITY OF MANITOBA to lend or sell copies of this thesis, to the NATIONAL I-lBRARY oF CANADA ro microfilm this thesis and to lend or seil copies of trre firnr, and UNIVERSITY MICROFILMS to publish an abstract of this rhesis. author rte reserves oilrer pubricatio¡l rigrrts, and neither trre thesis nor extensjve extracts from it may be printed or other_ wise reproduced without the autl.¡or's written permission. TABLE OF CONTENTS Pa ge ACKNOWLEDGEI'IENTS .....J ABSTRACT ...... ii Chapter l. Introduct'ion.. i Analyt'ical Framework ... 5 Pressure Group Typology.. 6 Techniques and Nature of Lobbyìng Activìty. 9 Locus of Lobbyìng Actìv'ity. ii Research Questions. 16 l4ethodology.. 17 Data and Information Sources. 18 Chapter D'ivjsions.. 20 2 The Pol 'i cy Envi ronment and Organi zational Setti ng. ?I Poi'icy Devel opnrents ?I Organizatjonal Devel opments 32 Local Representat'ive and/or Govern'ing Bodi es . 40 J.1 Initiatives and Interaction l885-1960: The Formati ve Years. 45 4. Initiat'ives and Interaction 1960-1970: The Confrontationist Decade 85 tr In'itiat'ives and Interaction 1968-1973: The Confrontationist Quinquenn'ium.. 118 Table of Contents (contrd) Pa ge 6. Initiatives and interact'ion 1974-1979: The Accommodative Interlude.. ... I49 7. Initiat'ives and Interaction 1979-1982: The Return to Confrontati on. I72 Conclusion .....207 B'ibl i ography. ¿15 l. AC KNOl,JL IDG EM ENTS I w'ish to thank the many peopie who ejther by granting me access to official or persona i fj I es , consenti ng to i ntervi ews , answerì ng questi ons , or typìng the various drafts of thjs thesis, fac'ilitated its completion. In particular I extend speciaì thanks to my advisor Professor Paul G. Thomas for hjs guidance throughout. J.G. 'tl ABSTRACT 'is exami ne the j ni ti at j ves The genera'l purpose of thi s study to , and interactions of local resident groups ìn Jasper and Banff with the federal government concernìng various aspects of the land leasìng issue from l8B5 to 1982. That issue jnvo'lves dìsputes over leasing terms, land rents, and the closeìy related quest'ions of townsite management and local sel f-government. The research ut'i I i zes an hi stori cal -analyti ca1 approach and is couched in pressure group theory. l4ore specifically, it utilizes an analytjcaì framework proferred by Paul Pross for analyzing pressure group behavi oulin Canada . 'l The four pri nci pa'l research questì ons are as fol I ows : ) who are the local pressure groups that have been'involved in the land leasing debate, what have been their objectives, and where do they fit'in Pross's typology; ?) what has been the locus of thejr lobbyìng activity has it been primariìy the execut'ive, the bureaucracy or the leg'islature; 3) what has been the nature of their lobbying act'iv'ity has it been prìmariìy access-oriented or ræd'ia-oriented, and accommodatjve or confrontationist; and 4) does their behav'iour conform to Pross's propositions for pressure groups in theìr particular category? The research findìngs indicated that the local pressure groups from Jasper and Banff were the School Boards, the Chambers of Cor¡merce, and the Advisory Councils which were superseded by the Jasper Towns'ite Committee and the Banff Community Society. The principaì obiect'ives of those groups have been nominal land rents, equjtable service taxes, security of tenure on leases, and greater resjdent ìnput into townsjte management. G'iven their organjzational features they approximate Pross's category of fledgling and mature groups. The locus of theìr lobbying act'ivity has genera'lìy been ft]. successive min'isters respons'ible for national parks, a'lmost to the comp]ete exclusion of other Cabinet members and senior bureaucrats. The major exception was a five year perìod from 1974 to 1979 in whjch they had consjderable interaction with bureaucrats. The federal ìegìslative arena served prìmarily as an appeal nechanism in whjch M.P.s acted as ombudsnen, I i ai son offi cers and even I obbyi sts . The pressure groups aì so expìoited the federal nature of the system by using the Alberta government as an appeaì mechanism. ldhile their ìobbyìng technìques varied, the general tendency of the groups was to empìoy access-oriented techniques of an accoìmodative nature, and only when those proved unsatisfactory did they resort both to access and media orjented techniques of a confrontationist nature, and ultìmately even to "'legaì advocacy". Such behavjour conforms, at least in a general wâY, to Pross's tentative propos'itions for pressure groups in the mature and fledgì ing cateEories. In fact, these findings reflect, that there was a close correlation between jstitutional growth and increasing'ìy sophis- tjcated behaviour over tjme. Yet, whjle it is conceded that organizational and systemic factors are significant determjnants of pressure group behaviour, this research concludes that perhaps even more s'ignificant determjnants are the importance that governmentaì and non-governmental actors attach to certajn issues, and their respective perceptions of one anoth e r. CHAPTER 1 I NTRODUCTI ON The first Canadian national park was established nearly a century ago. Today there are over thirty nationaì parks in thjs country and at least another half-dozen in the p'ìann'ing. Thìs gives canada the dis- t'inction of havìng one of the most extensive and perhaps also one of the 'l best nati onal park systems i n the worl d. Neverthel ess , 'i ke others , ì t also has ìts problems. Durìng the past several decades members of dl'f- ferent academ'ic discìp'l'ines have examined various aspects of the Canadian national park system. Numerous studies have focussed on the biologìcaì, geologicaì, and environmental features of vanious parks, several have examined the environmental impact of various management practìces, and soire have even examìned the economic impact of national parks on certain 1 regions.' Few studies however have focussed on the polr't'ica'l factors surrounding the land leasìng practìces jn the nat'ional parks.2 To do so is the broad purpose of this study. when the f i rst nat'ional park was establ'ished some major poì ìcy obiectjves and princ'ip'ìes were enunciated which, with varyìng degrees of conmjtment, have been upheld to the present. Two of the nlost signìficant obiectjves outlined 'in successive national park acts and policy state- ments are: (l) that all national park lands are to be crown property; lFo" un extens'ive bibìiography on a'll the.se'areas see J.G. Nelson and R.c. Scace, eds., The canadian Nat'ional parks: Today and Tomorrow Conference I, (Calgary R:C.$ace, eds . , Íhe- Canadi an ruali onál parfté: Today a nd Tomorrow Confer- ence I I , (l.la te r:l oo '".n. the three volume work by W.F. Lothian, A Hiqtory of Canada' Nqlignal Parks, (Ottawa, Parks Canada, Voi. l, l 976,m. 3, î9-79I;ffiì-.'Nelson, ed., þnadiañ ruat'ionál parrs in pãispectíue, (Montreal: Harvest House Ltd.,m a L and (2) that natjonal park land granted for private use must be granted accordjng to specia'l land leasìng or ljcencing arrangements for an econ- omic rent. It'is these two related tenets of park ìand tenure that con- stitute the basjs of an interest'ing and at times intense land leasìng debate in some of Canada's natjonal parks. in the words of W.F. Lothian: When the foundìng fathers of Canada's national park system made provisions Rocky Mountajns Park in the 'lease Act of 1BBT for the di sposa'l of I and by for the purposes of trade, industry and ordinary habitat'ion they init.iated a phase of admin'istration that would bother park officjals for nnny years to come. The terms for wh'ich leases were drawn, the rates of rentals to be charged, and the rìght to perpetual renewal would collectiveìy and separately 'legìslationproduce problems requìring extended negot'iqtìon, frequent and considerable pacìfication. J It js conceded that it would be ideal to gìve comprehensive con- siderat'ion to all the Canadjan nat'ional parks in whjch land ìeasing has proved to be a signìficant'issue. That is not poss'ib1e, however, due to time contraints and problems in gathering suffìcient jnformat'ion on all the parks. Another contributìng factor to that decjsion'is that, as is alluded to'in the above quotation, the land leasìng issue is nejther simple nor unjdimens'ional, but multjfaceted and compiex. In add'ition to the fundamental questìon of whether nationa'ì park land should be granted for private use, 'it also involves a set of corollary questions. For examp'le, given that park land js to be used for prìvate purposes, questìons arjse about how much should be granted and for what purposes; should it be granted by lease or sold; what should be the duratjon and terms of a lease; and what rent should the crown request for leased land? Other questìons which figure promjnentlyin the land leasing debate'in Jasper and 3tothi an , op.