Algonquin Provincial Park

[micheal_can]

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.

In theory, if ON Bus were utilized right, it could be used. They would need to have some sort of operations centre local as the drivers would eat a lot of time to go back to North Bay.

Going to a reservation system for the trails may mitigate the issue. The politics are much different as BP is a federal and Algonquin is provincial.

 

[lenaitch]

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.

I'm not sure what you mean by the the ONR route 'going through the area' and 'introducing it to their route'. I trust you are not suggesting that the rail line be re-directed or a spur be built. Ignoring the fact that there is currently no passenger service, it's not their track - it is CN's. I'm not familiar with Huntsville's transit system but will assume it is very small, with small vehicles. In order for the town to care about servicing out of town, there would want to something in it for their residents.

Do campers 'go into town to party' these days? Has it come to this? I thought camping was its own reward. Is Algonquin enroute to becoming like Wasaga?

A problem with a shuttle service, any shuttle service, whether it originates off-site or from some centralized parking lot, is that camp sites are scattered in several locations throughout the park. They would either be a very slow doodling around the sites, or drop passengers off at the site entrance, which would entail a walk, with gear, possibly in the dark, not to mention the disruption to other campers. It lends a new meaning to the 'last km' issue. If the shuttles were some kind of highway sized coach to accommodate pax and gear, then it would require yet another shuttle to get closer to the camp sites.

Edit - It strikes me that there are a number of suggestions to increase access to the Park while, at the same time, folks are saying the Park has a capacity and congestion problem.

 

[lenaitch]

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

Possible we we would let your brother stay! LOL

He just has to accept a natural yard.

As does Algonquin. I'm not sure how widespread it is, but I don't think either leases or privates exclaves within parks is particularly uncommon.

 

[Northern Light]

As does Algonquin. I'm not sure how widespread it is, but I don't think either leases or privates exclaves within parks is particularly uncommon.

Rondeau and Algonquin are the two examples I know best.

Both have seen controversies where the province either moved to terminate leases (at their natural expiry date) or upon death.

There was pushback.

In more recent parks, the tendency has been to literally put the boundaries of the park around cottages/settlements.

In the case of Rouge mind you, ownership of land and buildings has remained with the original owners wherever Parks Canada has deemed it has no need to take the property to deliver its management plan.

 

[micheal_can]

I'm not sure what you mean by the the ONR route 'going through the area' and 'introducing it to their route'. I trust you are not suggesting that the rail line be re-directed or a spur be built. Ignoring the fact that there is currently no passenger service, it's not their track - it is CN's. I'm not familiar with Huntsville's transit system but will assume it is very small, with small vehicles. In order for the town to care about servicing out of town, there would want to something in it for their residents.

Do campers 'go into town to party' these days? Has it come to this? I thought camping was its own reward. Is Algonquin enroute to becoming like Wasaga?

A problem with a shuttle service, any shuttle service, whether it originates off-site or from some centralized parking lot, is that camp sites are scattered in several locations throughout the park. They would either be a very slow doodling around the sites, or drop passengers off at the site entrance, which would entail a walk, with gear, possibly in the dark, not to mention the disruption to other campers. It lends a new meaning to the 'last km' issue. If the shuttles were some kind of highway sized coach to accommodate pax and gear, then it would require yet another shuttle to get closer to the camp sites.

Edit - It strikes me that there are a number of suggestions to increase access to the Park while, at the same time, folks are saying the Park has a capacity and congestion problem.

The buses operated by ONR could be used in the park. It would make the most sense as they are all highway coaches. At this point, there is no suggestions to put a rail line back into the park. The congestion is the day users as well as the campers. Having several buses going throughout the park might be the solution. Having a bus from Huntsville and Pembroke feeding into the park also might work well.

 

[lenaitch]

The buses operated by ONR could be used in the park. It would make the most sense as they are all highway coaches. At this point, there is no suggestions to put a rail line back into the park. The congestion is the day users as well as the campers. Having several buses going throughout the park might be the solution. Having a bus from Huntsville and Pembroke feeding into the park also might work well.

Ok, if highway coaches, what do campers and day trippers do once they are dropped off at some fixed point?

Absent a passenger train, perhaps a private entrepreneur reading these suggestions can undertake renting a parking lot, buying a fleet and hope there is a market.

 

[micheal_can]

Ok, if highway coaches, what do campers and day trippers do once they are dropped off at some fixed point?

Absent a passenger train, perhaps a private entrepreneur reading these suggestions can undertake renting a parking lot, buying a fleet and hope there is a market.

I would think there could be 2 different services. One service that brings people to the park. Another service that goes to the different things in the park.

 

[Fritter]

If it is the day trippers that are the real problem, then maybe sightseeing bus tours are the solution. Based out of Toronto, Huntsville or Ottawa/Arnprior/Renfrew, making just a couple of stops within the park that are of significance, for picture taking etc, then that should reduce the traffic and control somewhat the other congestion concerns.

 

[lenaitch]

If it is the day trippers that are the real problem, then maybe sightseeing bus tours are the solution. Based out of Toronto, Huntsville or Ottawa/Arnprior/Renfrew, making just a couple of stops within the park that are of significance, for picture taking etc, then that should reduce the traffic and control somewhat the other congestion concerns.

Tour buses are already part of the traffic mix, certainly during 'fall colours' time. This is evident in other areas, such as Muskoka, as well. Whether many originate out of smaller places communities I suppose depends on the individual private carriers. I know Hammond out of Muskoka operates seasonal tours but haven't bothered to look where they originate from (from where they originate?).

To my mind, for people simply wanted to drive (or be driven) into the country to look are pretty autumn scenes, going specifically to Algonquin in unnecessary. Factors such a vistas, forest composition that lends itself to vibrant colours, etc. exist in many, many areas through central Ontario, including Muskoka, Beaver Valley, Northumberland, etc.. However, I do appreciate that tour companies will play on the 'cache' of Algonquin.

 

[Richard White]

If it is the day trippers that are the real problem, then maybe sightseeing bus tours are the solution. Based out of Toronto, Huntsville or Ottawa/Arnprior/Renfrew, making just a couple of stops within the park that are of significance, for picture taking etc, then that should reduce the traffic and control somewhat the other congestion concerns.

This is already a thing as noted but the main concern is how they tie up traffic along Highway 60. They are large, cumbersome and full of tourists who want to stop on the side of the road to take pictures.

During the fall colours you have dozens or so buses lining the highway which causes problems.

 

[Richard White]

I'm not sure what you mean by the the ONR route 'going through the area' and 'introducing it to their route'. I trust you are not suggesting that the rail line be re-directed or a spur be built. Ignoring the fact that there is currently no passenger service, it's not their track - it is CN's

There was a rail line running into Algonquin up until the 1950s. It included a hotel called the Highland Inn which burned down and was created by the Grand Trunk Railway. See here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highland_Inn

The Highland Inn was a tourist attraction in its own right and the rail service helped bring tourists into what was then a barren woodland.

It stands to reason that with the right schedule and proper cars attached to it, a train would be a boon for the park. It would be easy to pack up all your camping gear and bring it to an outlying GO station (not Union) and grab a train to the park. Parkbus is ok but it has limited capacity for storage and has a weird schedule. You could even do scenic tours akin to that in Agawa Canyon.

 

[micheal_can]

There was a rail line running into Algonquin up until the 1950s. It included a hotel called the Highland Inn which burned down and was created by the Grand Trunk Railway. See here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highland_Inn

The Highland Inn was a tourist attraction in its own right and the rail service helped bring tourists into what was then a barren woodland.

It stands to reason that with the right schedule and proper cars attached to it, a train would be a boon for the park. It would be easy to pack up all your camping gear and bring it to an outlying GO station (not Union) and grab a train to the park. Parkbus is ok but it has limited capacity for storage and has a weird schedule. You could even do scenic tours akin to that in Agawa Canyon.

Currently parts of the Track and Tower trail as well as the bike path from Mew Lake to Rock Lake run the old ROW. Not that bringing rail back is a bad idea, but how do you deal with the aspect of loosing tails to it?

 

[Richard White]

Currently parts of the Track and Tower trail as well as the bike path from Mew Lake to Rock Lake run the old ROW. Not that bringing rail back is a bad idea, but how do you deal with the aspect of loosing tails to it?

With all the logging in and around the park, I am sure they could create a new rail line through the park.

 

[micheal_can]

With all the logging in and around the park, I am sure they could create a new rail line through the park.

No doubt they could. Just making you aware of the existing ROW.

 

[lenaitch]

With all the logging in and around the park, I am sure they could create a new rail line through the park.

I'm not sure I get the connection between logging and running a railway, and ignoring the fact that the 'main use corridor' (Hwy 60) is protected from logging, but I'd love to see the economics of laying and operating a stub line of approx. 45 miles solely for seasonal tourist use.