Algonquin Provincial Park

[Northern Light]

I have a (personal) list of priorities for new/expanded Provincial Parks in southern Ontario.

Some have plans associated w/them (formally) for their creation/expansion while others are my 'wish list' alone.

I would identify the following priorities:

Rondeau Provincial Park, major expansion: Reason, there is not a single wilderness class park in the south-west portion of the province. Rondeau is the largest park in this region, and adjacent areas are relatively low-cost to acquire, including some homes, and lots of farm.

Below is a photo of the expansion I would like to see which would allow this area to function as a wilderness park. The existing park is the dark green peninsula. The area w/the white outline is what I would add, roughly increasing the park size by a factor of 4 to 12,000 ha or 30,000 acres.

Next would be a new park to link Presqu'ille to Sandbanks.

This would relieve congestion at 2 very popular parks allow the the Bay area to be more natural for wildlife and create a critical mass of natural shoreline. Lake Ontario's shoreline is almost entirely urbanized along the western half of the Lake, and much of the rest is cottage/agriculture. It would nice to set aside a real area of nature on Lake Ontario.

Third would to assemble larger parks along the Niagara Escarpment.

Beginning with an enlarged Shorthills Provincial Park.

I would enlarge it to combine it with nearby Conservation Areas, and to provide both a continuous natural corridor to the lake, and the headwaters of at least on major creek.

This would add roughly 1,800ha to the current areas and linking 3 conservation areas and the exiting provincial park:

PS, I'm quite fond of the Pelham Winery and would be open to a carve-out, LOL

In total this would protect a ~10,000 acre area in Niagara, a bit smaller than Rouge Park.

This would likely be my most expensive new park:

I would combine the majority of Halton Region Conservation Properties.

Crawford Lake, Rattlesnake Point, Kelso and Hinton Falls along with Mt. Nemo and link all points between, plus build a wildlife corridor (vegetated bridge) across the 401.

This would be a 16,000ha, 40,000 acre park.

This would be my last super park on the Escarpment south of Owen Sound:

It would combine the existing Boyne Valley Provincial Park, Hockley Valley Nature Reserve and Mono Cliffs Provincial Park into a single park enlarged by occupying the spaces between these.

A good deal of this area is already natural.

***

I have a few more sites in mind, but I think that's enough for one day!

 

[Undead]

I don't understand the point about commuters. Presumably commuters and park goers drive at different times and days. So I'm not sure how a transit system to address commuter demand does anything to alleviate camping traffic.

 

[99Messier]

I have a (personal) list of priorities for new/expanded Provincial Parks in southern Ontario.

Some have plans associated w/them (formally) for their creation/expansion while others are my 'wish list' alone.

I would identify the following priorities:

Rondeau Provincial Park, major expansion: Reason, there is not a single wilderness class park in the south-west portion of the province. Rondeau is the largest park in this region, and adjacent areas are relatively low-cost to acquire, including some homes, and lots of farm.

Below is a photo of the expansion I would like to see which would allow this area to function as a wilderness park. The existing park is the dark green peninsula. The area w/the white outline is what I would add, roughly increasing the park size by a factor of 4 to 12,000 ha or 30,000 acres.

View attachment 275389

Next would be a new park to link Presqu'ille to Sandbanks.

This would relieve congestion at 2 very popular parks allow the the Bay area to be more natural for wildlife and create a critical mass of natural shoreline. Lake Ontario's shoreline is almost entirely urbanized along the western half of the Lake, and much of the rest is cottage/agriculture. It would nice to set aside a real area of nature on Lake Ontario.

View attachment 275390

Third would to assemble larger parks along the Niagara Escarpment.

Beginning with an enlarged Shorthills Provincial Park.

I would enlarge it to combine it with nearby Conservation Areas, and to provide both a continuous natural corridor to the lake, and the headwaters of at least on major creek.

This would add roughly 1,800ha to the current areas and linking 3 conservation areas and the exiting provincial park:

View attachment 275391

PS, I'm quite fond of the Pelham Winery and would be open to a carve-out, LOL

In total this would protect a ~10,000 acre area in Niagara, a bit smaller than Rouge Park.

This would likely be my most expensive new park:

I would combine the majority of Halton Region Conservation Properties.

Crawford Lake, Rattlesnake Point, Kelso and Hinton Falls along with Mt. Nemo and link all points between, plus build a wildlife corridor (vegetated bridge) across the 401.

This would be a 16,000ha, 40,000 acre park.

View attachment 275393

This would be my last super park on the Escarpment south of Owen Sound:

View attachment 275394

It would combine the existing Boyne Valley Provincial Park, Hockley Valley Nature Reserve and Mono Cliffs Provincial Park into a single park enlarged by occupying the spaces between these.

A good deal of this area is already natural.

***

I have a few more sites in mind, but I think that's enough for one day!

You just expropriated by brothers house so that City folks would not have to drive as far to see nature.

 

[Northern Light]

You just expropriated by brothers house so that City folks would not have to drive as far to see nature.

There are still cottages within Rondeau Provincial Park; and still houses within Rouge Park.

Possible we would let your brother stay! LOL

He just has to accept a natural yard.

****

On a marginally more serious note. Any expansion of public parks, just as with building subways, requires taking someone's property.

When required, it should be done with lots of notice, and very fair compensation. But in the end, the needs of the many, out weigh the needs of the few, or the one.

 

[tmlittle]

To address the original problem:

I am starting this thread to discuss the challenges of the park and what can be done to ease the congestion that has only gotten worse over the years.

My suggestion would be to raise parking fees and use the revenue for some kind of subsidized seasonal bus service with generous luggage allowances for hauling gear. You'd really eat into the parking/traffic requirements by shifting at least some weekend backpacker types to a service like this. Ultimately it's a chicken and egg, you can see with the recent effective demise of MEC that in recent years outdoorsmen and backpackers have been heavily supplanted by car campers, especially anywhere in the travel radius of the GTA, and among younger people there's more interest in "active lifestyle" stuff than true outdoorsmanship. It's a shame, but perhaps controversially, I'd argue that the elimination of train service to Algonquin and weekend coach services to rural areas has helped facilitate this. To get out of the city and go camping you effectively need a car (or to be a very determined and well equipped cyclist), and once the car is a given, there's the temptation to haul every gizmo and piece of trash you own to your car-accessed campsite. Once you have a population of people like that, what "camping" means gets reconfigured around that market - and that's effectively what has happened.

 

[Northern Light]

I don't understand the point about commuters. Presumably commuters and park goers drive at different times and days. So I'm not sure how a transit system to address commuter demand does anything to alleviate camping traffic.

That would depend on which congestion.

Drivers to Algoinquin on a Friday evening will overlap with the go-home commuter crowd, especially up to Barrie, and 35/115; but also at points beyond; since not everyone is going from Toronto.

(ie, some people will be commuting Oshawa-Ptbo; and others Barrie to Bracebridge.)

This, of course is not reflected in terms of congestion actually wthin the park.

 

[MisterF]

I have a (personal) list of priorities for new/expanded Provincial Parks in southern Ontario.

Some have plans associated w/them (formally) for their creation/expansion while others are my 'wish list' alone.

I would identify the following priorities:

Rondeau Provincial Park, major expansion: Reason, there is not a single wilderness class park in the south-west portion of the province. Rondeau is the largest park in this region, and adjacent areas are relatively low-cost to acquire, including some homes, and lots of farm.

Below is a photo of the expansion I would like to see which would allow this area to function as a wilderness park. The existing park is the dark green peninsula. The area w/the white outline is what I would add, roughly increasing the park size by a factor of 4 to 12,000 ha or 30,000 acres.

View attachment 275389

Next would be a new park to link Presqu'ille to Sandbanks.

This would relieve congestion at 2 very popular parks allow the the Bay area to be more natural for wildlife and create a critical mass of natural shoreline. Lake Ontario's shoreline is almost entirely urbanized along the western half of the Lake, and much of the rest is cottage/agriculture. It would nice to set aside a real area of nature on Lake Ontario.

View attachment 275390

Third would to assemble larger parks along the Niagara Escarpment.

Beginning with an enlarged Shorthills Provincial Park.

I would enlarge it to combine it with nearby Conservation Areas, and to provide both a continuous natural corridor to the lake, and the headwaters of at least on major creek.

This would add roughly 1,800ha to the current areas and linking 3 conservation areas and the exiting provincial park:

View attachment 275391

PS, I'm quite fond of the Pelham Winery and would be open to a carve-out, LOL

In total this would protect a ~10,000 acre area in Niagara, a bit smaller than Rouge Park.

This would likely be my most expensive new park:

I would combine the majority of Halton Region Conservation Properties.

Crawford Lake, Rattlesnake Point, Kelso and Hinton Falls along with Mt. Nemo and link all points between, plus build a wildlife corridor (vegetated bridge) across the 401.

This would be a 16,000ha, 40,000 acre park.

View attachment 275393

This would be my last super park on the Escarpment south of Owen Sound:

View attachment 275394

It would combine the existing Boyne Valley Provincial Park, Hockley Valley Nature Reserve and Mono Cliffs Provincial Park into a single park enlarged by occupying the spaces between these.

A good deal of this area is already natural.

***

I have a few more sites in mind, but I think that's enough for one day!

You just proposed converting thousands and thousands of hectares of active farmland to wilderness parks. These areas haven't been wilderness for 200 years. Good luck with that.

 

[Northern Light]

You just proposed converting thousands and thousands of hectares of active farmland to wilderness parks. These areas haven't been wilderness for 200 years. Good luck with that.

I proposed connecting existing wildness parcels to one another by restoring some of the farmland in between.

In terms of doability; this is very do-able if the political will is there.

I have personally been involved with ecological restoration of land; some of it far more altered and damaged than these farm areas.

The Nature Conservancy often restores farm lands.

Lets be clear, in total area, what I'm proposing is very small. But its this sort of idea that is critical not just for humans but to protect and restore endangered habitats and species.

Its always possible to nitpick over the total size or exact boundaries.

But the ecological guidelines are clear, its very difficult to re-establish a fully functioning ecosystem w/less than 12,000ha/30,000 acres of contiguous habitat.

and

Southern-western Ontario has only one area that large, Bruce Peninsula National Park.

That's it.

Asking for 4 more is not asking the world (plus 1 in eastern Ontario)

It should be said, some of this land including in PEC and on the shores of Lake Erie is currently suffering severe erosion and flooding, which should make some owners amenable to a buy-out.

 

[micheal_can]

I'm wondering what the OP means by congestion. If it is campsite/canoe route/trail, that speaks to capacity and can really only be addressed by opening up more of the park (not in favour) or, as mentioned, more public use spaces at other or new facilities. Keep in mind that, in addition to public use, a provincial park is also an ecological preserve. Algonquin has notoriety, but there are others, many of which are much less well known (whether they are sufficient for the growing population in southern Ontario is a question). Kawartha Highlands' at 37,500 and Queen Elizabeth II, 33,500ha; both south of Algonquin. How many have heard of these? Maybe they could have enhanced facilities.

Or does congestion refer to daytrippers driving through looking at the scenery, maybe or maybe not using (and paying for) park facilities? This is huge weekend problem this time of year with private car and charter bus 'leafpeepers', and I'm wonderiing if this is the question given the timing of the post. A reality is that the road is a provincial highway, not unlike the highways through Banff and Jasper. I used to enjoy a day trip ride on the bike this time of year but have come so close the death enough times that I no longer go (stopping dead in a live land over the brow of a hill to take a picture of the pretty leaves, or wandering absentmindedly on the roadway). I doubt this type of tourist would be diverted to shuttle buses, but at least if they were there would be fewer vehicles travelling 40kmh. Perhaps more roadside parking areas.

Some kind of transit/parkbus, if it was attractive at all, would only be attractive to tent campers; although I say this not knowing if Algonquin accommodates trailers and RVS

The MNRF has had their budget decimated over many years and many governments, and now that Ontario Parks has been hived off to the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks, I doubt they are suddenly flush with cash.

As the OP, I am looking at the issue of so many campers an day users at this park. There are exceptionally busy times of the year that are the problem. You describe unsafe things that shoud not be the case. Does that mean that there needs to be more police presence, a paved shoulder to pull off on, or something else?

I don't understand the point about commuters. Presumably commuters and park goers drive at different times and days. So I'm not sure how a transit system to address commuter demand does anything to alleviate camping traffic.

The commuters to the park is much different than the congestion within the park. The issue I wonder about is the congestion in the park. If this is fixed and commuting to the park is also fixed, even better.

To address the original problem

My suggestion would be to raise parking fees and use the revenue for some kind of subsidized seasonal bus service with generous luggage allowances for hauling gear. You'd really eat into the parking/traffic requirements by shifting at least some weekend backpacker types to a service like this. Ultimately it's a chicken and egg, you can see with the recent effective demise of MEC that in recent years outdoorsmen and backpackers have been heavily supplanted by car campers, especially anywhere in the travel radius of the GTA, and among younger people there's more interest in "active lifestyle" stuff than true outdoorsmanship. It's a shame, but perhaps controversially, I'd argue that the elimination of train service to Algonquin and weekend coach services to rural areas has helped facilitate this. To get out of the city and go camping you effectively need a car (or to be a very determined and well equipped cyclist), and once the car is a given, there's the temptation to haul every gizmo and piece of trash you own to your car-accessed campsite. Once you have a population of people like that, what "camping" means gets reconfigured around that market - and that's effectively what has happened.

So... How do we make it happen?

 

[tmlittle]

Beats me. You'd need the park management to cooperate and probably a sympathetic transit operator to hire to run it. I doubt the people running the park would do anything that might cut down on the number of people who go.

 

[Northern Light]

Beats me. You'd need the park management to cooperate and probably a sympathetic transit operator to hire to run it. I doubt the people running the park would do anything that might cut down on the number of people who go.

Bruce Peninsula National Park has actually limited people.
It hasn't cut back the number of campsites; that wasn't really the issue.
The issue was day users all wanted to go the Grotto ( a very beautiful cave off the water; with a natural skylight in it; and adjacent swimming cove.)
The number of people all going to the same spot simply became too much.

As such you now need a reservation to go there during all peak-times of year.
That applies to daytrippers and campers alike; needing to book a window to hike to that spot.
I think that's unfortunate; and is really on BlogTO to be honest.
Their culture of posting;; "You really need a selfie taken here" clickbait has overwhelmed a lot of spots with people who really don't have any appreciation of nature or desire to stay more than 5 minutes.
They also often arrive with no knowledge of etiquette (not littering/leaving a mess, not bringing a bike on a hiking only trail etc etc.)
Also they often lack proper gear and safety know-how.
The Grotto has a fairly groomed trail most of the way; but if you don't know your in rattlesnake country, or bear country, or to have the good sense to wear proper footwear, you're apt to find yourself in some difficulty.

Sigh.

Algonquin may need to impose this on certain day-use areas or trails that are becoming over-taxed.
But that's a real staff burden/cost not to mention a royal PITA for those who have always been good stewards of the park and just want to enjoy some vacation time in nature.

 

[lenaitch]

As the OP, I am looking at the issue of so many campers an day users at this park. There are exceptionally busy times of the year that are the problem. You describe unsafe things that shoud not be the case. Does that mean that there needs to be more police presence, a paved shoulder to pull off on, or something else?

As far as I recall Hwy 60 already has paved shoulders through the park; if not all then a good piece of it and what isn't done is planned.

Perhaps at the end of the day, access needs to be limited. At some point, the environment gets pounded into the ground by the sheer amount of use. Recall that you used to have to pass through a gate to access the highway through the park. Maybe they need to go back to that. Of course this means capacity has to be found elsewhere.

As a kid we went to Scenic Caves (private), near Collingwood, and thought it was pretty cool. A number of years ago we took our daughter. The site was over-crowded and the rocks had been worn smooth from all the foot traffic. Nature can only take so much of us.

 

[White Pine]

It's a day use problem. Camping capacity is already limited so is not causing congestion. We're talking about 2+km lines and overflowing parking lots full of fall leaf watchers that seems to be the main issue. Widening the highway is a dumb idea and I hope they don't do it.

 

[Mcurtis]

Would Ontario Northland be a possible solution to the issues of congestion in the park and around it? Their routes already go through this area so it wouldn't be a huge increase in logistics or capacity to introduce that to the route. Although it would add about 1.5 to the total route time. Increase the frequency in the summer to allow for additional trips to Algonquin park to reduce the number of people who are using their personal vehicles to get to these areas. That would allow for people in Toronto and other areas to be able to get to that area without the need for a vehicle and could maybe increase the revenue for Northland as an operation.

Huntsville has a transit service although I am sure that it's limited in the scale and scope. A fee of some type for users of the park or funding from the province could be implemented, provided to Huntsville to run a bus to the campground every so often to provide services so park users don't need to go into town with their own vehicle. It's not a short distance by any means of 66 km one way, but if you could use a bus service to bring you into town to party on a Friday or Saturday night and then back to your campsite without the concern of driving then I'm sure that would have some pull.

Is the other option a move to a booked time option? Bruce Peninsula National Park uses a time slot approach where you have to book your time allowed inside of the park in advance. Allowing for only 4-hour timeslots to reduce the number of people who are inside the park at a time. Obviously, it would take some political will to do so but that could be another option for reducing how many day travelers there are and vehicles within the park facilities itself.

Queen Elizabeth II is the wildlands park. As mentioned before it is fully natural with limited to no facilities or amendments to the natural space. Areas, where they consider to be 'camping', are rocks or flat spaces. Someone asked the question earlier about it.

 

[Jasmine18]

Car camping has been super popular this year and the fact is you dont need any outdoor skills to do it.

The only skill you need is how to make a fire really.