Darwin defines park brilliantly

Dear Editor:

The best definition that I have found for a park is from a dissertation by a famous naturalist, Charles Darwin (1809-1882).  His definition of a park is: “A park is an area of natural, semi-natural, or planted space set aside for human enjoyment and recreation or for the protection of wildlife or natural habitats.”

Very straightforward and to the point. It is, in my opinion, as true today as it was then. It couldn’t be put any simpler! What part of this does city council not understand?

Mayor and council seem to project a view that the benefits of “giving away part of the park” will make the park more attractive to tourists. The tourists are here for about three months each year. Most of the resident taxpayers are here all year round. Many of us frequent the park through all four seasons and not just the summer. How, as past experience shows (the demise of two waterslides through the years), does council see this proposed renaissance developing into anything other than a lesson in what not to do?

Further to this, we all know that land is not a renewable resource and that once redeveloped, will irrespective of any effort, never be the same! Evidently the council’s mantra is “We’re right; they’re wrong and we ain’t quittin’!” Maybe that should be printed on their business cards. It does have a ring to it, doesn’t it?

In future when they look at the legacy that they have left, I’m sure that it will fill their hearts with pride and make them puff out their chests like cock robin feeling good about himself after a good feed of worms and insects.

Has the question been addressed as to what might happen if this project is one of abject failure? Probably not! Is there a plan B that we are not told about if this “21st century Dodo Bird Project,” doesn’t come to fruition? We’ll probably never know as the “Elected Intelligentsia”  keeps information unto itself until after the fact becomes real.

This is true democracy in action?


When all is said and done and this proposed monolith is still here perhaps then we should have a rededication ceremony to “honour” those that aspired to greatness by proposing the project.

On second thought, maybe we should just forget about this idea as we are led to believe that time heals all wounds or is it time wounds all heels?

Ron Barillaro