Former PC MLA Thomas Lukaszuk posted on X “Presumptive to assume that Canadian National Parks would not be retained by Canada” (in the event of provincial secession).

The claim that several non-contiguous parcels of Canadian territory would remain within a province if it became independent is one of the more absurd ones made by federalists, but we hear it often. It’s asserted that Canada would maintain claim to national parks and Alberta would simply have to work around them. It’s not reasonable and wouldn’t happen in the case of successful provincial separation.

Assuming a province held a clear vote with a clear majority to secede as per the Clarity Act, the negotiation stage would begin and national parks would be among the easiest of properties to deal with. No province would be interested in ending the protected status of such parks and the only incentive Canada would have to maintain control of them would be based on spite, not any realistic need or ability to manage the land.

Go Ad Free

Further, there are thousands of Albertan citizens living in national parks. Uprooting and deporting them isn’t a realistic option, but that’s what presumably would happen if they suddenly became foreign territory.

When Czechoslovakia split during the 1990s, national parks were transferred to the respective new territories they landed within. Krkonoše National Park remained entirely within the Czech Republic and Tatra National Park remained in Slovakia. It was one of the simplest parts of their negotiation to separate.

In the event of provincial secession, ownership of national parks within the new countries by the remainder of Canada is as likely as the newly independent province maintaining a claim of partial ownership in national parks outside of its borders. It’s just not going to happen.

The national parks won’t be going anywhere. The biggest difference to be seen would be that the flags at the gates would change.