Canada, Parks. “Parks Canada to Create Expert Panel to Advise on a Long-Term Framework for How Visitors Will Get around the Bow Valley and Experience Banff National Park.” Canada.ca, Government of Canada, 3 November 2020, www.canada.ca/en/parks-canada/news/2020/11/parks-canada-to-create-expert-panel-to-advise-on-a-long-term-framework-for-how-visitors-will-get-around-the-bow-valley-and-experience-banff-nationa.html. 

 

The Canadian agency responsible for national parks, “Parks Canada,” has announced the creation of a new board of experts to develop a sustainable future for Banff. The agency announced on its website that the move was to promote ecological integrity and continue Banff’s tradition of environmental stewardship. The panel’s main focus will be on developing infrastructure to maximize ease of movement around the park with minimal disruption for the ecosystem. It says this will greatly increase the quality of the visitor experience, and a “long term framework” will provide Canadians with opportunities to access the valley. They will work with indigenous peoples and the public to guide their deliberations. 

 

The article is an example of how government agencies can work towards environmental goals in a way that is sustainable for both the environment and visitors. The value in such an approach is obvious. The more interesting take away from the article is the employment of some misdirectional language. The article was posted by Parks Canada on their website, and they make it seem like the board is being assembled to further ecological integrity. But when you look past the language, it’s clear that the board is being assembled to increase the amount of visitors to the park. The panel is supposed to develop new technologies and transportation modes that give people multiple easy ways to move around the park, hence increasing the capacity of the park and improving the visiting experience. Now, this isn’t inherently a bad thing, but it’s certainly not a move to further preservation efforts. It makes me nervous to think that policies that could hurt the environment could be disguised in some linguistic Trojan Horse. Especially with environmental matters, we need to be critical.