WCPP threatened with motorized access

[red langford]

WCPP is classed a Wilderness Park, and as such there is very restrictive motorized access year round. As many of you have experienced first hand the more portages you put between you and the motorized access points the less garbage, the less destructive impact on the land. It seems one outfitter feels that the rules are not worthy of following and the access restrictions are not worthy of adherence. After buying a LUP from a previous camp operator this outfitter feels the rules should change for his benefit. If you value the wilderness values that WCPP provides I suggest you write to the park superintendent and express that.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/thunder-bay/outiftter-ban-access-trails-1.3921261

 

[Alan Gage]

It will be interesting to see what happens here. If he's given permission to do so, or does as he threatens and does it anyway, how many other cabin owners will follow suit? There's no shortage of fly-in fishing camps and I imagine most of them are shut down in winter because of lack of access. Will others follow suit?

It might be a bit easier for me to swallow if it was someone's personal cabin but, as far as I know, nearly all of the cabins and outposts are owned by people and businesses who rent them out to fishermen and hunters.

Alan

 

[Bothwell Voyageur]

Disappointed that this should be a canoe outfitter well known to many on this site. He's lost my business. WCPP is designated to protect woodland caribou and snowmobile access could impact them.

 

[Robin]

I posted this on the CBC article,

• Robin Lauer

I'm not a Canadian, I live in the eastern US. I drove 2 days each way (1500 miles), rented rooms, bought meals across northern Ontario just to canoe WCPP., only because it has a reputation for being the most pristine wilderness canoe destination available without driving to the far north.
I was very happy with my experience in WCPP, it is a very beautiful area that gives the traveler the feeling that it is what Ontario was like back in the day of canoe travel.
I own a Canoe website, Canoetripping.net, we have 750 plus members and have become one of the most active canoe sites on the net. I have been very vocal about my experience in WCPP. If the park is opened to motorized travel I will have to reevaluate my opinion of the park and it's value to those willing to spend the time/money to reach this distant location.

 

[sweeper]

Thank you Robin

 

[Harlan]

Good evening folks. Perhaps I can provide a little clarity and context about this situation because sometimes that gets lost when things like this happen. First, WCPP does allow motorized access. In fact, there is a fairly active corridor between the Bloodvein and Gammon River systems that allows for this. For those that have visited the park in the past, you may have seen some of this use, or perhaps, been a guest at one of the outposts.

As far as this matter goes, when i made my application for a Land Use Permit for Olive Lake, it was granted as a motorized use outpost. Further, it was also made clear to park officials that this would be the first ever winterized cabin in the park, allowing visitors to enjoy the incredible Boreal Winter up here. To be clear, all our commercial guests are FLY IN ONLY. This is true for summer and winter and is not what this article is about. In saying this, the Legislation in Ontario provides commercial tourism operators access via motorized and non motorized use to access their tourism opportunity for reasons to further the business. What i am looking to do is haul material into the outpost for construction of a new structure. I have legal authority to do this under the legislation. This was never about recreational snowmobiling, this is about improving the cabin and property.

I think before everyone jumps the gun, ask yourself how you would respond if you invested hundreds of thousands of dollars into a project and then the government one day told you that even though you have legal rights to access it, you cannot. I think most here would respond in a similar matter.

And so we are all clear, over the past 6 years, i have built my business operating side by side with park officials Nobody in the history of the park has put more personal money or energy into furthering the experience in the park. I routinely travel all over the world promoting the park, and the wilderness opportunities that can be experienced within. I have led over 40,000 metres of trail clearing efforts over the past 5 years, more than the Ontario Parks office has done in the past decade. I bleed for this park, it is my business, my livelihood, my life. But at the end of the day, sometimes you have to stand up for the rights we've all earned. The world never got to be a better place by being complacent. The park office has been caught in some lies in this situation and it was their own inability to recognize the laws of the Province that led to the press getting involved.

As a side note, Red Langford, you have an agenda to try and cast me in a bad light, you have been doing so for years. It hasn't worked to this point so please cut it out.

I'd ask everyone to truly understand the facts of this situation and then respond instead of just knee jerk reactions.

Harlan Schwartz
Red Lake Outfitters Inc.

 

[Muskrat]

Didn't expect that...

 

[Bothwell Voyageur]

So Harlan are you saying that you were misquoted by the CBC article?

I would like to hear the park's view on this but it is unlikely to be forthcoming if legal action is being threatened and they don't usually comment on specific cases.

 

[Nodrama43]

Thanks Robin and thanks Harlan for weighing in as well.

 

[Harlan]

So Harlan are you saying that you were misquoted by the CBC article?

I would like to hear the park's view on this but it is unlikely to be forthcoming if legal action is being threatened and they don't usually comment on specific cases.

No, i will always stand by my words. What the article doesn't go into though is the 5 months of back and forth between my business and the park office regarding my accessing the my outpost this winter. I have the Director of Northwest Region for Ontario Parks on the record stating that he saw no issues with what i was going to do. I have provided the specific Legislation granting my access, satisfied all criteria (4 in total) for accessing the outpost and they have ignored the very Legislation that they have sworn oaths to be directed by. The bottom line is the local Ontario Parks office is attempting to operate autonomously and eventually someone has to stand up. There are some in the office with an extreme bias for their own agenda....this is not how government officials should be operating. Wouldn't we all expect that policy be directed by facts and not the whims of a few rogue individuals?

I think it's also worthy to note that if anyone thinks that there is no snowmobiling taking place in the park, they are mistaken. Historically, the route i would travel to access Olive Lake has been snowmobiled and currently is being used by a local trapper. All trails are in place, no cutting of vegetation or harm to the environment would be caused. In fact, the route is primarily on crown land where anyone is fully legal to travel with snowmobile. The area in question is simply 8KM of lake and trail travel. It should also be noted that currently, several members of Pikangikum First Nation are snowmobiling in the park, very close to my outpost. Snowmobiling and trapping have been active for decades.

As stated before, I am likely the largest supporter of the park. I would never do anything to harm the park, interfere with wildlife or cause a disturbance. To think otherwise is simply foolish. This was already screened months ago in our discussions. It's simply a matter of all criteria being satisfied and a few people within the park office taking it upon themselves to do anything to block Ontario Legislative rights. It's not legal, it's not right. It needs to be exposed and the truth needs to be heard. Isn't that what we would all expect?

Harlan

 

[boatstall]

Harlan, is this an accurate quote from the CBC article?

Quote:
Schwartz said he's frustrated that he can only use aircraft to access the area. He said it's a safety concern.
"To not have a route out, if something happened to that client, puts their lives in danger. You know, Ontario Parks is always looking at mitigating risk. They sure do it in the summertime. In the summer, if you have a rain squall or a storm it usually passes, in the winter, you could be a couple days."

 

[Harlan]

Yes, absolutely, but context needs to be applied. Tomorrow morning at 0700, a long form version of the interview will be live on CBC radio. If you listen to it, it'll be a lot easier to understand that particular quote.

To summarize, our permit for the outpost currently allows for winter use. It's an approved and listed use and we've already flown in several groups of clients over the past 2 seasons. When discussing access to the outpost this winter, the issue of client safety was raised by the Ontario Parks director in Thunder Bay. He agreed whole heartedly that having a "backup access via snowmobile" (non recreational), was indeed prudent to the safety of guests. Having the navigable route in and out by snowmobile was seen as essential in his eyes. This is a fact and part of the official record. The bottom line to all this is there is more to this than just the few paragraphs of the article. In fact, client safety is one of the 4 criteria discussed in my last post.

My issue is not that I use aircraft for moving clients in and out..that was our agreed upon plan all along and one we have no issue with. We do however take issue with conflicting statements from the local Ontario Parks office and the statements from the Director. If one were to see all the facts, understand the ENTIRE situation and the background surrounding everyone, you would see a very clear picture of the Ontario Parks office operating in bad faith to satisfy their own agenda and not following the Legislation of the Province of Ontario. Facts are facts and can't be changed. This will all come out. What does appear to change though is the position of Ontario Parks. Again, if it was your business, your money and livelihood, how would you respond?

 

[boatstall]

Good evening folks. Perhaps I can provide a little clarity and context about this situation because sometimes that gets lost when things like this happen. First, WCPP does allow motorized access. In fact, there is a fairly active corridor between the Bloodvein and Gammon River systems that allows for this. For those that have visited the park in the past, you may have seen some of this use, or perhaps, been a guest at one of the outposts.

As far as this matter goes, when i made my application for a Land Use Permit for Olive Lake, it was granted as a motorized use outpost. Further, it was also made clear to park officials that this would be the first ever winterized cabin in the park, allowing visitors to enjoy the incredible Boreal Winter up here. To be clear, all our commercial guests are FLY IN ONLY. This is true for summer and winter and is not what this article is about. In saying this, the Legislation in Ontario provides commercial tourism operators access via motorized and non motorized use to access their tourism opportunity for reasons to further the business. What i am looking to do is haul material into the outpost for construction of a new structure. I have legal authority to do this under the legislation. This was never about recreational snowmobiling, this is about improving the cabin and property.

I think before everyone jumps the gun, ask yourself how you would respond if you invested hundreds of thousands of dollars into a project and then the government one day told you that even though you have legal rights to access it, you cannot. I think most here would respond in a similar matter.

And so we are all clear, over the past 6 years, i have built my business operating side by side with park officials Nobody in the history of the park has put more personal money or energy into furthering the experience in the park. I routinely travel all over the world promoting the park, and the wilderness opportunities that can be experienced within. I have led over 40,000 metres of trail clearing efforts over the past 5 years, more than the Ontario Parks office has done in the past decade. I bleed for this park, it is my business, my livelihood, my life. But at the end of the day, sometimes you have to stand up for the rights we've all earned. The world never got to be a better place by being complacent. The park office has been caught in some lies in this situation and it was their own inability to recognize the laws of the Province that led to the press getting involved.

As a side note, Red Langford, you have an agenda to try and cast me in a bad light, you have been doing so for years. It hasn't worked to this point so please cut it out.

I'd ask everyone to truly understand the facts of this situation and then respond instead of just knee jerk reactions.

Harlan Schwartz
Red Lake Outfitters Inc.

The red highlighted text above that you wrote to all of us, contradicts your reasoning of "safety concerns" shown below from the CBC article.


Quote:
Schwartz said he's frustrated that he can only use aircraft to access the area. He said it's a safety concern.
"To not have a route out, if something happened to that client, puts their lives in danger. You know, Ontario Parks is always looking at mitigating risk. They sure do it in the summertime. In the summer, if you have a rain squall or a storm it usually passes, in the winter, you could be a couple days."

 

[Harlan]

The red highlighted text above that you wrote to all of us, contradicts your reasoning of "safety concerns" shown below from the CBC article.


Quote:
Schwartz said he's frustrated that he can only use aircraft to access the area. He said it's a safety concern.
"To not have a route out, if something happened to that client, puts their lives in danger. You know, Ontario Parks is always looking at mitigating risk. They sure do it in the summertime. In the summer, if you have a rain squall or a storm it usually passes, in the winter, you could be a couple days."

No, actually it does not. My intended purpose for using snowmobiles to access my outpost is to haul in material to the building site. It always has been. When i discussed this plan with the Park Office and Director, the safety concerns of clients was brought up and in fact it was agreed upon by the Director that in doing so, it would also allow for a safe "exit" strategy if a client had an issue.

Please do not try and paint a picture that is not there. The author of the article simply picked one of the dozens of quotes during the interview. If you have the opportunity to listen to the interview tomorrow, it will become quite apparent.

 

[yellowcanoe]

I think a forum can present the two or more sides of a story which is all well and good but we have all seen media cherry picking.. Lets calm down and listen.. Too bad the topic was posted without complete understanding IMO.

Thanks for your input Harlan.

 

[red langford]

***Removed***

 

[Nodrama43]

I concur that the "media" usually has an agenda themselves when they attempt to report facts. Most of the time many facts are left out to help manipulate the viewers/readers opinion. I have personal history with this to the point I filed a lawsuit against a media giant and won a six figure jury award. Incomplete sound bites, little snippets of conversations, half quotes, are all used as tools to manipulate our thoughts about issues. Thanks again Harlan for speaking up. I cannot speak for anyone but myself but it sounds like you have the law on your side, and no ill intentions for the park. Good luck.

 

[Iskweo]

There are always multiple sides to a story. Harlan has done a lot of work establishing a business in Red Lake. He has endured some lean years in the process. Good for him that he has managed to expand anyway. He does supply a quality service.

On the other hand, he is not popular in the community, especially so with his peers, the other camp operators. This I know from talking with some friends in the industry. So while he can cry foul, he cannot claim the policy to be unfairly applied only to him. It applies to everyone. The fact that a few people are accessing trap lines and such by snowmobile is to be expected on the edges of the park. I also know that MNR enforces park boundaries rigidly with respect to ice fishing on the Manitoba side. Even going so far as to patrol with aircraft.

If you can fly in people in the summer, you can fly in building supplies. That is how other people manage it. Aikens Lake Lodge in MB does so regularly. Granted, they have deeper pockets than Harlan. The fact remains, you can fly the materials in. You can fly them in in winter too if your operator has skis. I have flown on twin otters with skis and I imagine someone has an Otter set up that way. In fact, you can fly in a lot more in one trip than you can sled in and it likely works out the same in the end with multiple trips compared to a single flight.

I do like the idea of a winter fly in ...it would be totally awesome. Is there some risk..you betcha. That adds to the sense of wilderness eh.

Maybe he should buy a cabin on some remote Crown land and set up his winter operation there? There is a cabin on Obukowin he could have had cheap.
I get the impression that he wants to access by ground transport to save money. It would be cheaper than airfare and also kind of cool but really it is just colouring outside the lines which is why he is running into problems with it.

No motorised access means just that. That is the current trend in Park management in a number of provinces. Manitoba included. So either play within the parks rules or play outside the park.

 

[yellowcanoe]

Always good to have more local insight. I had been wondering how the old timers would regard the new operation.. so to speak the new kid on the block from away. I agree he seems to deliver a quality service; but what is good for one ought to apply to all.

 

[Harlan]

Appreciate hearing peoples opinions but need to address a few things.

1: ISKWEO, not sure where you are getting your information from but we partner with several operators in the area on a weekly basis. Sure maybe the ones we don't partner with may not like that, but that's for their own reasons and they likely need to grow up a little. Please do not try and paint myself or my business in a bad light. I'm proud of the work we do and the people we work and partner with. To date, we've outfitted over 3,000 paddlers on successful trips that have had an amazing experience. Most of our clients return annually. I'll put my business record and how we conduct business up to anyone, anytime. Perhaps you are getting your information from a few people with an agenda to cast me in a bad light?

2: My point is being proven over and over again here. We need to focus on what this article and issue is about and not stray from that....it's easy to be mislead away from the point when others throw in filler but let's focus on the issue at hand. The FACT is that as a tourism operator, the Park Management Plan and Ontario Legislation makes a provision for me to access my LUP at Olive Lake via mechanized and non-mechanized use. This is clear, this is written into law and is my right. Based on this right, I pursued the opportunity and i invested hundreds of thousands of dollars into a project. Now in year 2 of the project, Ontario Parks (locally) believes i should only use aircraft to access the cabin. That's all fine and dandy but it's not their money, its not their resources and it's not their right to go against the very laws of this province and their own Management Plan. Further, evidence proving this to them has been shown in person and via email and is part of the official record. Their response......well their response is actually no response.....they dismiss the very documents that they develop policy from and tell me to take them to court. It's a shame and i'd bet that if anyone here was posed with a similar situation, they'd respond just as I have. I have spent 5 months going back and forth with the park office proving to them i have rights.....if they don't think i do, they have options, but in Provincial Court they will be the ones having to answer for why they went against their own plans and directives.

...and once again, WCPP does not have a "non motorized" use approach....in fact, the park is very much a motorized use park, it's just limited to certain areas.

... and for those that actually want to go a little deeper and seek the truth, a very similar battle happened 2 years ago when Viking Island on Douglas Lake changed ownership. With it, the new owner told the park he would be accessing his Island in the winter via snowmobile. That part of the park had been classified "non-motorized"....but as a tourist operator and land owner, he had rights to access the property. The park persisted, the owner of Viking Island challenged Ontario Parks and, as in my case, he was in the right. He now routinely hauls in material to his island on Douglas Lake in the winter via snowmobile. The area is still closed to recreational use, however the laws of the province and the Park Management Plan allow him to do this. This is the exact same situation as I am facing.

So please everyone, open discussion is good, but lets focus on the truth. This is not about snowmobiling around in the park. This is holding Ontario Parks accountable to their own laws and regulations. Rogue employees that operate in bad faith can only do so for so long before their fingers are caught in the cookie jar......and they just got caught.

Harlan