More Thoughts on the National Park

I just listened to the Bil Good show segment featuring Doug hooper, Michael Cornelissen plus call-ins, and all speakers seemed to have missed the most salient point, regardless of whether for or against the park. 

That is the 'crossroads' choice. Bowen's European settlement history centred first on homesteading and logging, plus a bit of mining and brick making, but this rapidly gave way to the Union Steamship 'Happy Isle' era, which ended in the 50's. 

Bowen languished in the late fifties to late 70's, despite the coming of the car ferry and some residential development- Lenora/ Melmore, Tunstall, Bluewater. Yes there were summer homes and visitors, an d some local service economy, but the population dropped in the sixties, and was barely over 500 people in the latter 70's. 

We've seen an explosion (relatively) of full time residency on the island since then, and while there are still a number of weekenders/summer people, we are primarily a bedroom community with a high proportion of commuters. 

OCP's going back to the 80's have tried to crystal ball our 'grow out', and given the number of folios, have predicted about 7500 people on Bowen if all lots were built out. Obviously, if smaller lots or more multi family units go in, that number would rise. 

But Bowen's destiny as a lovely residential enclave would, in this scenario, be sealed regardless of build out numbers. Yes, we would still have visitors and artists and small institutions and services, but the focus of the community would be residential. Nothing really wrong with that, but much of Bowen's pristine, safe, small community appeal would likely be diluted over time. 

The biggest impact of a National Park, much more so than the existing regional park, would be to change the focus of Bowen's future from residential, to residential PLUS tourist, and better conservation, some educational resources. It would be a game changer over time, though that time period would be longer than most of us would still be here to see. 

Thirty years from now (and that's a common long term planning horizon), we expect Metro to be home to 3.5 million people, perhaps pushing 4. Bowen would be about 7000 give or take. Ferry issues- like in the past, obviously BC Ferries or their successor will have had to up service, unless we run out of oil or oil substitutes and are not as mobile as today. 

With a National Park in the equation, there will be more visitors, there will be no more alienation of now public land for residential growth (think the southern toe of Mount Gardner, or the area adjacent to Seymour, both Crown lands). The watershed will be protected, there will be no logging in Park lands, and if one extends the time horizon, those perils probably would otherwise increase. 

That is really the primary choice for Bowen Islanders-  to choose one of two uncertain futures. To go down the park path, or continue the residential path. Obviously, there are scenarios of 'cake and eat it', but in simple terms it is more public land or more private land. And that choice is WAY beyond ferry or local propriety issues (or perceived proprietary rights). 

Bowen isn't going to go back to the USSC heydays, regardless, but a National Park would certainly alter our place in the region. That future would be quite different from where we are now headed.