This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Banff National Park article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | Banff National Park is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on October 15, 2006. | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Toolbox |
---|
Just trying to be helpful.-- MONGO 07:36, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Also we can expand the discussions of the animal species in the park, a list of threatened and or endangered species, and any natural resource programs going on there.-- MONGO 08:28, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Maybe a little more expansion on Park Management...there is a section here that has more information: [1]. Maybe some mention of forest fires, if there are many. I think after that, run it through spellcheck, make sure the references all work and then send it to peer review.-- MONGO 03:34, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
I found the info I was looking for. I have to say the article's organization is tough to follow. Kevlar67 16:20, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
I did a basic copy edit on the first third of the article, through the History section. There are a couple of things I saw but didn't fix: under Prison and Work Camps two successive sentences read as follows:
Either there was one camp or there was more than one camp. The sentences clash on that point. I'm here to polish form, not mess with content, so could someone with the requisite knowledge fix it? Also, there are several instances where the name of a piece of legislation is italicized. Is this the proper style in Canada? It's not consistent throughout the article, anyway, because there are at least two non-italicized references to the National Parks Act. I'm a little too weary to do the research on this point. Rivertorch 06:04, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
Much more should be made of the origins of the park - openly modelled on Yellowstone - which from the first included provisions for the extraction of timber and mineral resources within the park boundaries. The Hot Springs were one asset that was to be protected by a national park, but the lesson of Yellowstone was that a park could also "protect" valuable resources. In addition to Bankhead and Anthracite, there were several other small mining towns in the park area in the early days, including Silver City and (if memory serves) Coppermine. From day one the park was an uneasy compromise between competing interests for supporters of a resort, of resource exploitation and of wilderness preservation. Two other points, much more could be said of the issue of forest fires in the park and surroundings - forest fires were a regular and devasting occurrence (often caused or exacerbated by human activity) in the area, particularly in the early years. And more could be said of the uses of the region by native people before Europeans arrived - if I remember correctly, the hot springs were known to the aboriginal peoples of the region and used by them as a recreation ground. An intersting irony of the Park is that, although it is often assumed or said that the Park is an attempt to preserve nature in its pristine state, there is considerable evidence that even before Eurpoeans arrived the area had already been altered by humans and diverted from the pristine. Pinkville 02:53, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
You bet. i know there are some books that provide the information I'm referring to - but i conducted my own research about 8 years ago and i can't recall any titles or names. But I'll see what I can find and add what I can as well. Pinkville 00:20, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
There has been some vandalizarion to the page and I am unaware of the correct information. The name of the Prime Minister has been changed. So other information has been added. User:Jbebeau 05:39, 21 November 2006
some1 vandilised and i cant fix it, help please. Sometimes1must 22:53, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
Fixed it. - User: Anon 07:25, 16 October 2006
There are at least two claims to be the hydrological apex of North America: Snow Dome and Triple Divide Peak in Montana. Both peaks drain into three bodies of water, but they can't both claim to be the hydrological apex - either only one of them is the true hydrological apex, or both of them should be considered to be a hydrological apex. See the talk page for Snow Dome for a more detailed version of this question. I can't answer the question authoritatively enough to warrant editing any of these pages, but hopefully asking the question on this higher-profile page will catch the attention of someone who can.
Note that there may be other mountains making the same claim. For example, there may be a point that drains into the Pacific Ocean and the Gulfs of Mexico and California, and another that drains into the Gulf of Mexico, the Caribbean Sea, and the Pacific Ocean.
sMacJ 20:08, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
this is crap —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.16.85.178 ( talk) 01:27, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
Could the location dot for the park be changed to red please? I had a real job spotting it in amongst all the other green areas (which I assume are other national parks?) It would stand out immediately if it were red. 81.147.147.86 ( talk) 13:37, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
some paragraph lack footnotes.-- Jarodalien ( talk) 12:18, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
Like "Internment camps", "Winter tourism", "Fire management", and I just add few {{ cn}} tage.-- Jarodalien ( talk) 00:39, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
It is hard to correct sentences like this, "The pre-existing structure left over from mountain-building has strongly guided glacial erosion: mountains in Banff include complex, irregular, anticlinal, synclinal, castellate, dogtooth, and sawback mountains[33] and many of the mountain ranges trend North-Northeast, with sedimentary layering dipping down to the West at 40–60 degrees." This colon after glacial erosion and the following run on sentence about the structural geology all sourced to a 1977 book I can't access leave me lost. I think the best correction would be to delete this sentence and a few others from the geology section, but, no matter how bad, this tends to anger writers. The geology is poorly organized and appears to have been copied (I don't mean plagiarized) by someone who read it but did not fully comprehend the big picture. I can't easily find a good general text on the geology that I can access to rewrite these parts. If someone can suggest one, or a review article, I would be willing to clean up and fix this section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:285:101:9DAF:34AA:9AEE:8B0F:9B4 ( talk) 10:47, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
I would like to just delete some sentences that are wrong. Quartzite is not a sedimentary rock. The tectonics in this regime are not glacial. Some of this is misinformation because the writer did not know geology. Some of it is mangled information from bad prose. Will other writers object to removing what is wrong? It seems that when you say the sky is carrot orange, it is better to delete it rather than ask for a citation as the bad info sits, as I have done. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:285:101:9DAF:7D71:373B:633B:CB8F ( talk) 12:53, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
1. "The Canadian Rockies consist of several northwest-southeast trending ranges.[33][34]"
2. Closely following the continental divide, which is the western boundary of the park, the Main Ranges form the backbone of the Canadian Rockies.
3. The Front Ranges are located east of the Main Ranges.[35]
4. Banff National Park extends eastward from the continental divide and includes the eastern slope of the Main Ranges and much of the Front Ranges.
5. The latter include the mountains around the Banff townsite.
6. The foothills are located to the east of the Park, between Calgary and Canmore.
7. On the other side of the Park, the Western Ranges pass through Yoho and Kootenay National Parks.
8. Still farther west is the Rocky Mountain Trench, the western boundary of the Canadian Rockies region in British Columbia.[34]
9. Though the tallest peak entirely within the park is Mount Forbes at 3,612 metres (11,850 ft), Mount Assiniboine on the Banff-Mount Assiniboine Provincial Park border is slightly higher at 3,618 m (11,870 ft).[36]
10. The Canadian Rockies are composed of sedimentary rock, including shale, sandstone, dolomite and limestone.[33] The geologic formations in Banff range in age from Precambrian to the Jurassic periods (600–145 m.y.a.).[34] Rocks as young as the lower Cretaceous (145–66 m.y.a.) can be found near the east entrance and on Cascade Mountain above the Banff townsite.[37]
11. These sedimentary rocks were laid down in shallow seas between 600 and 175 m.y.a. and were pushed east and over top younger rocks during the Laramide orogeny.[38] Mountain building in Banff National Park ended approximately 55 m.y.a.[38] There are three prominent thrusts shown in geological maps of Banff National Park and they broadly define the largest structures of the park, so pushed east, okay, put that isn't how I would describe Laramide structures because it doesn't focus on the folding. The Bourgeau Thrust, the Sulphur Mountain Thrust, and the Rundle Thrust. Are all these Laramide structures? Bourgeau Thrust (Santonian, Mesozoic Assembly of the North American Cordillera, Hildebrand?), Sulphur Mountain Thrust (Maastrichtian/Campanian), Rundle Thrust (late Jurassic/early Cretaceous), so what was going on for the intervening "seas laid down until 175 MA" and "orogeny ended 55 MA," did orogeny start 175 MA? Then make the mountain building begin and end.
12. The Canadian Rockies may have towered 8,000 metres (26,000 ft) around 70 m.y.a near the end of the mountain building period.[39]
13. Once mountain formation ceased, erosion from water and greatly augmented later from glacier ice beginning with the Quaternary glaciation 2.5 m.y.a. carved the mountains into their present shapes. Glacial landforms dominate Banff's geomorphology, with examples of all classic glacial forms, including cirques, arêtes, hanging valleys, moraines, and U-shaped valleys.
14. The pre-existing structure left over from mountain-building strongly guided glacial erosion: mountains in Banff include complex, irregular, anticlinal, synclinal, castellate, dogtooth, and sawback mountains.[40]
15. Many of the mountain ranges trend North-Northeast, with sedimentary layering dipping down to the West at 40–60 degrees.[34]
16. This leads to dip slope landforms, with generally steeper east and north faces, and trellis drainage, where rivers and old glacial valleys followed the weaker layers in the rocks and caused them to be relatively easily weathered and eroded.[34][41]
17. Classic examples are found at the Banff townsite proper: Mount Rundle is a classic dip slope mountain,[42] and the Spray and Sulphur river drainages flow parallel to the geological strike of the mountain range.
18. Just to the North of Banff townsite, Castle Mountain exemplifies a castellate shape, with steep slopes and cliffs. Castle Mountain is composed of Cambrian rocks of the Cathedral formation (limestone), the Stephen shale above it, and the Eldon formation (limestone).[43][44]
19. Dogtooth mountains, such as Mount Louis, exhibit sharp, jagged slopes.[45] The Sawback Range, which consists of near-vertically dipping sedimentary layers, has been eroded by cross gullies.[46] Scree deposits are common toward the bottom of many mountains and cliffs.
20. Photographic evidence alone provides testimony to this retreat and the trend has become alarming enough that glaciologists have commenced researching the glaciers in the park more thoroughly, and have been analyzing the impact that reduced glacier ice may have on water supplies to streams and rivers.
21. ... Bow Glacier retreated an estimated 1,100 m (3,600 ft) between the years 1850 and 1953,[47] and since that period, there has been further retreat which has left a newly formed lake at the terminal moraine. Peyto Glacier has retreated approximately 2,000 m (6,600 ft) since 1880,[48] and is at risk of disappearing entirely within the next 30 to 40 years.[49]
22. Both Crowfoot and Hector Glaciers are also easily visible from the Icefields Parkway, yet they are singular glaciers and are not affiliated with any major icesheets.
23. The Columbia Icefield, at the northern end of Banff, straddles the Banff and Jasper National Park border and extends into British Columbia.
24. Snow Dome, in the Columbia Icefields, forms a hydrological apex of North America, with water flowing from this point into the Pacific via the Columbia, the Arctic Ocean via the Athabasca River, and into the Hudson Bay and ultimately into the Atlantic Ocean, via the North Saskatchewan River.[47]
25. Saskatchewan Glacier, which is approximately 13 km (8.1 mi) in length and 30 km2 (12 sq mi) in area,[47] is the major outlet of the Columbia Icefield that flows into Banff. Between the years 1893 and 1953, Saskatchewan Glacier had retreated a distance of 1,364 m (4,475 ft), with the rate of retreat between the years 1948 and 1953 averaging 55 m (180 ft) per year.[47] Overall, the glaciers of the Canadian Rockies lost 25 percent of their mass during the 20th century.[50]
2601:283:4301:D3A6:DC63:FC39:86B3:6D1E ( talk) 14:31, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
26. Can you name the subranges in geographical order, and cite this, such as the Bow is at the divide? then roughly trending west to east? I can't find the information to add. 2601:283:4301:D3A6:ECA7:CBFA:3732:E0B0 ( talk) 16:05, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
We would like to add a section about wildlife management as a subheading in the Park Management section to expand it.
The article correctly attributes settlers' blaming "the depletion of wildlife in the park on the Indians' reliance on subsistence hunting." But this claim was shown to be false. The article does not mention this, so I corrected it (but someone keeps removing it). Anyone can probably find a link to this fact, but please stop removing my one sentence update. Either remove the fallacious notion that First Nations inordinately depleted wildlife, or keep the added sentence which corrects the historical error. 65.255.177.125 ( talk) 22:47, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
...
Minor lake in Banff National Park. Not notable enough for it's own article. Cbs527 00:55, 27 October 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cbs527 ( talk • contribs)
Any objections to throwing this article into the current pile of potential TFA reruns (currently being developed at User:Dank/Sandbox/2)? Any cleanup needed, apart from the 11 dead or dubious links? MONGO, did you want to have a look at this one? - Dank ( push to talk) 23:47, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Banff National Park. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:35, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
This Article is already rated as a FA class article so I am hesitant to edit it, however it seems to lean heavily towards describing the history and biodiversity of the park (which is good) but is completely lacking on the tourism section which should explain what kind of facilities, infrastructure and attractions tourists can expect to find in the park as well as more information on how one can travel to and around the park. Since Jasper National Park is still a Start Class Article I am going to work on improving it first, however I would like to know if anybody has any thoughts or objections to a major expansion of the tourism section of this article. IDrive201 ( talk) 01:39, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
It would be nice to rerun this at WP:Today's featured article, but there's a fair amount of uncited text. Anyone want to look at that? - Dank ( push to talk) 02:06, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Banff National Park article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | Banff National Park is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on October 15, 2006. | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Toolbox |
---|
Just trying to be helpful.-- MONGO 07:36, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Also we can expand the discussions of the animal species in the park, a list of threatened and or endangered species, and any natural resource programs going on there.-- MONGO 08:28, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Maybe a little more expansion on Park Management...there is a section here that has more information: [1]. Maybe some mention of forest fires, if there are many. I think after that, run it through spellcheck, make sure the references all work and then send it to peer review.-- MONGO 03:34, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
I found the info I was looking for. I have to say the article's organization is tough to follow. Kevlar67 16:20, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
I did a basic copy edit on the first third of the article, through the History section. There are a couple of things I saw but didn't fix: under Prison and Work Camps two successive sentences read as follows:
Either there was one camp or there was more than one camp. The sentences clash on that point. I'm here to polish form, not mess with content, so could someone with the requisite knowledge fix it? Also, there are several instances where the name of a piece of legislation is italicized. Is this the proper style in Canada? It's not consistent throughout the article, anyway, because there are at least two non-italicized references to the National Parks Act. I'm a little too weary to do the research on this point. Rivertorch 06:04, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
Much more should be made of the origins of the park - openly modelled on Yellowstone - which from the first included provisions for the extraction of timber and mineral resources within the park boundaries. The Hot Springs were one asset that was to be protected by a national park, but the lesson of Yellowstone was that a park could also "protect" valuable resources. In addition to Bankhead and Anthracite, there were several other small mining towns in the park area in the early days, including Silver City and (if memory serves) Coppermine. From day one the park was an uneasy compromise between competing interests for supporters of a resort, of resource exploitation and of wilderness preservation. Two other points, much more could be said of the issue of forest fires in the park and surroundings - forest fires were a regular and devasting occurrence (often caused or exacerbated by human activity) in the area, particularly in the early years. And more could be said of the uses of the region by native people before Europeans arrived - if I remember correctly, the hot springs were known to the aboriginal peoples of the region and used by them as a recreation ground. An intersting irony of the Park is that, although it is often assumed or said that the Park is an attempt to preserve nature in its pristine state, there is considerable evidence that even before Eurpoeans arrived the area had already been altered by humans and diverted from the pristine. Pinkville 02:53, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
You bet. i know there are some books that provide the information I'm referring to - but i conducted my own research about 8 years ago and i can't recall any titles or names. But I'll see what I can find and add what I can as well. Pinkville 00:20, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
There has been some vandalizarion to the page and I am unaware of the correct information. The name of the Prime Minister has been changed. So other information has been added. User:Jbebeau 05:39, 21 November 2006
some1 vandilised and i cant fix it, help please. Sometimes1must 22:53, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
Fixed it. - User: Anon 07:25, 16 October 2006
There are at least two claims to be the hydrological apex of North America: Snow Dome and Triple Divide Peak in Montana. Both peaks drain into three bodies of water, but they can't both claim to be the hydrological apex - either only one of them is the true hydrological apex, or both of them should be considered to be a hydrological apex. See the talk page for Snow Dome for a more detailed version of this question. I can't answer the question authoritatively enough to warrant editing any of these pages, but hopefully asking the question on this higher-profile page will catch the attention of someone who can.
Note that there may be other mountains making the same claim. For example, there may be a point that drains into the Pacific Ocean and the Gulfs of Mexico and California, and another that drains into the Gulf of Mexico, the Caribbean Sea, and the Pacific Ocean.
sMacJ 20:08, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
this is crap —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.16.85.178 ( talk) 01:27, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
Could the location dot for the park be changed to red please? I had a real job spotting it in amongst all the other green areas (which I assume are other national parks?) It would stand out immediately if it were red. 81.147.147.86 ( talk) 13:37, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
some paragraph lack footnotes.-- Jarodalien ( talk) 12:18, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
Like "Internment camps", "Winter tourism", "Fire management", and I just add few {{ cn}} tage.-- Jarodalien ( talk) 00:39, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
It is hard to correct sentences like this, "The pre-existing structure left over from mountain-building has strongly guided glacial erosion: mountains in Banff include complex, irregular, anticlinal, synclinal, castellate, dogtooth, and sawback mountains[33] and many of the mountain ranges trend North-Northeast, with sedimentary layering dipping down to the West at 40–60 degrees." This colon after glacial erosion and the following run on sentence about the structural geology all sourced to a 1977 book I can't access leave me lost. I think the best correction would be to delete this sentence and a few others from the geology section, but, no matter how bad, this tends to anger writers. The geology is poorly organized and appears to have been copied (I don't mean plagiarized) by someone who read it but did not fully comprehend the big picture. I can't easily find a good general text on the geology that I can access to rewrite these parts. If someone can suggest one, or a review article, I would be willing to clean up and fix this section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:285:101:9DAF:34AA:9AEE:8B0F:9B4 ( talk) 10:47, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
I would like to just delete some sentences that are wrong. Quartzite is not a sedimentary rock. The tectonics in this regime are not glacial. Some of this is misinformation because the writer did not know geology. Some of it is mangled information from bad prose. Will other writers object to removing what is wrong? It seems that when you say the sky is carrot orange, it is better to delete it rather than ask for a citation as the bad info sits, as I have done. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:285:101:9DAF:7D71:373B:633B:CB8F ( talk) 12:53, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
1. "The Canadian Rockies consist of several northwest-southeast trending ranges.[33][34]"
2. Closely following the continental divide, which is the western boundary of the park, the Main Ranges form the backbone of the Canadian Rockies.
3. The Front Ranges are located east of the Main Ranges.[35]
4. Banff National Park extends eastward from the continental divide and includes the eastern slope of the Main Ranges and much of the Front Ranges.
5. The latter include the mountains around the Banff townsite.
6. The foothills are located to the east of the Park, between Calgary and Canmore.
7. On the other side of the Park, the Western Ranges pass through Yoho and Kootenay National Parks.
8. Still farther west is the Rocky Mountain Trench, the western boundary of the Canadian Rockies region in British Columbia.[34]
9. Though the tallest peak entirely within the park is Mount Forbes at 3,612 metres (11,850 ft), Mount Assiniboine on the Banff-Mount Assiniboine Provincial Park border is slightly higher at 3,618 m (11,870 ft).[36]
10. The Canadian Rockies are composed of sedimentary rock, including shale, sandstone, dolomite and limestone.[33] The geologic formations in Banff range in age from Precambrian to the Jurassic periods (600–145 m.y.a.).[34] Rocks as young as the lower Cretaceous (145–66 m.y.a.) can be found near the east entrance and on Cascade Mountain above the Banff townsite.[37]
11. These sedimentary rocks were laid down in shallow seas between 600 and 175 m.y.a. and were pushed east and over top younger rocks during the Laramide orogeny.[38] Mountain building in Banff National Park ended approximately 55 m.y.a.[38] There are three prominent thrusts shown in geological maps of Banff National Park and they broadly define the largest structures of the park, so pushed east, okay, put that isn't how I would describe Laramide structures because it doesn't focus on the folding. The Bourgeau Thrust, the Sulphur Mountain Thrust, and the Rundle Thrust. Are all these Laramide structures? Bourgeau Thrust (Santonian, Mesozoic Assembly of the North American Cordillera, Hildebrand?), Sulphur Mountain Thrust (Maastrichtian/Campanian), Rundle Thrust (late Jurassic/early Cretaceous), so what was going on for the intervening "seas laid down until 175 MA" and "orogeny ended 55 MA," did orogeny start 175 MA? Then make the mountain building begin and end.
12. The Canadian Rockies may have towered 8,000 metres (26,000 ft) around 70 m.y.a near the end of the mountain building period.[39]
13. Once mountain formation ceased, erosion from water and greatly augmented later from glacier ice beginning with the Quaternary glaciation 2.5 m.y.a. carved the mountains into their present shapes. Glacial landforms dominate Banff's geomorphology, with examples of all classic glacial forms, including cirques, arêtes, hanging valleys, moraines, and U-shaped valleys.
14. The pre-existing structure left over from mountain-building strongly guided glacial erosion: mountains in Banff include complex, irregular, anticlinal, synclinal, castellate, dogtooth, and sawback mountains.[40]
15. Many of the mountain ranges trend North-Northeast, with sedimentary layering dipping down to the West at 40–60 degrees.[34]
16. This leads to dip slope landforms, with generally steeper east and north faces, and trellis drainage, where rivers and old glacial valleys followed the weaker layers in the rocks and caused them to be relatively easily weathered and eroded.[34][41]
17. Classic examples are found at the Banff townsite proper: Mount Rundle is a classic dip slope mountain,[42] and the Spray and Sulphur river drainages flow parallel to the geological strike of the mountain range.
18. Just to the North of Banff townsite, Castle Mountain exemplifies a castellate shape, with steep slopes and cliffs. Castle Mountain is composed of Cambrian rocks of the Cathedral formation (limestone), the Stephen shale above it, and the Eldon formation (limestone).[43][44]
19. Dogtooth mountains, such as Mount Louis, exhibit sharp, jagged slopes.[45] The Sawback Range, which consists of near-vertically dipping sedimentary layers, has been eroded by cross gullies.[46] Scree deposits are common toward the bottom of many mountains and cliffs.
20. Photographic evidence alone provides testimony to this retreat and the trend has become alarming enough that glaciologists have commenced researching the glaciers in the park more thoroughly, and have been analyzing the impact that reduced glacier ice may have on water supplies to streams and rivers.
21. ... Bow Glacier retreated an estimated 1,100 m (3,600 ft) between the years 1850 and 1953,[47] and since that period, there has been further retreat which has left a newly formed lake at the terminal moraine. Peyto Glacier has retreated approximately 2,000 m (6,600 ft) since 1880,[48] and is at risk of disappearing entirely within the next 30 to 40 years.[49]
22. Both Crowfoot and Hector Glaciers are also easily visible from the Icefields Parkway, yet they are singular glaciers and are not affiliated with any major icesheets.
23. The Columbia Icefield, at the northern end of Banff, straddles the Banff and Jasper National Park border and extends into British Columbia.
24. Snow Dome, in the Columbia Icefields, forms a hydrological apex of North America, with water flowing from this point into the Pacific via the Columbia, the Arctic Ocean via the Athabasca River, and into the Hudson Bay and ultimately into the Atlantic Ocean, via the North Saskatchewan River.[47]
25. Saskatchewan Glacier, which is approximately 13 km (8.1 mi) in length and 30 km2 (12 sq mi) in area,[47] is the major outlet of the Columbia Icefield that flows into Banff. Between the years 1893 and 1953, Saskatchewan Glacier had retreated a distance of 1,364 m (4,475 ft), with the rate of retreat between the years 1948 and 1953 averaging 55 m (180 ft) per year.[47] Overall, the glaciers of the Canadian Rockies lost 25 percent of their mass during the 20th century.[50]
2601:283:4301:D3A6:DC63:FC39:86B3:6D1E ( talk) 14:31, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
26. Can you name the subranges in geographical order, and cite this, such as the Bow is at the divide? then roughly trending west to east? I can't find the information to add. 2601:283:4301:D3A6:ECA7:CBFA:3732:E0B0 ( talk) 16:05, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
We would like to add a section about wildlife management as a subheading in the Park Management section to expand it.
The article correctly attributes settlers' blaming "the depletion of wildlife in the park on the Indians' reliance on subsistence hunting." But this claim was shown to be false. The article does not mention this, so I corrected it (but someone keeps removing it). Anyone can probably find a link to this fact, but please stop removing my one sentence update. Either remove the fallacious notion that First Nations inordinately depleted wildlife, or keep the added sentence which corrects the historical error. 65.255.177.125 ( talk) 22:47, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
...
Minor lake in Banff National Park. Not notable enough for it's own article. Cbs527 00:55, 27 October 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cbs527 ( talk • contribs)
Any objections to throwing this article into the current pile of potential TFA reruns (currently being developed at User:Dank/Sandbox/2)? Any cleanup needed, apart from the 11 dead or dubious links? MONGO, did you want to have a look at this one? - Dank ( push to talk) 23:47, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Banff National Park. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:35, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
This Article is already rated as a FA class article so I am hesitant to edit it, however it seems to lean heavily towards describing the history and biodiversity of the park (which is good) but is completely lacking on the tourism section which should explain what kind of facilities, infrastructure and attractions tourists can expect to find in the park as well as more information on how one can travel to and around the park. Since Jasper National Park is still a Start Class Article I am going to work on improving it first, however I would like to know if anybody has any thoughts or objections to a major expansion of the tourism section of this article. IDrive201 ( talk) 01:39, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
It would be nice to rerun this at WP:Today's featured article, but there's a fair amount of uncited text. Anyone want to look at that? - Dank ( push to talk) 02:06, 11 February 2024 (UTC)