BC Politics with Hubert Beyer

FORESTRY GIANT BOWS TO ENVIRONMENTALISTS

Details

Hits: 8381

VICTORIA – Forestry giant MacMillan Bloedel is suing for environmental peace, and Interfor may soon follow.

After years of battling environmental groups over its logging practices, MacBlo is prepared to abandon the clearcutting of old-growth forests.

Tom Stephens, president of MacMillan Bloedel, told the company’s annual meeting last week that many customers "don’t want wood from old-growth clearcuts." Just what harvesting methods MacBlo will use instead is unclear, except that they will be "selective."

No sooner had Stephens announced the dramatic change in his company’s policy, than Fred Lowenberger, senior vice-president of Interfor, jumped on the selective-logging bandwagon: "If they (MacMillan Bloedel) are successful with this, we’ll be right behind them."

Environmentalists, who have spent years lobbying overseas customers of B.C. lumber to boycott products from old-growth clearcuts, reacted as if they’d died and gone to heaven. The question is: should the rest of us join the celebration?

Well, that depends. If you like trees better than people making a living harvesting them, raise your glass and toast Greenpeace for a job well-done. In the long haul, things may not be that rosy.

I won’t even bother dealing with the assertions of many respected forestry experts who will tell you that under certain conditions and with certain species, clearcutting is not just the most economical but environmentally most sensible way of harvesting. Instead, let’s look at the most likely result of using exclusively selective harvesting methods.

One method is to use helicopters to cut trees selectively and fly them to a landing. That method doesn’t require roads, the conststruction of which ruins a sizable area for future planting, and it doesn’t damage trees left standing.

High-lining is another selective-logging method. A tower is erected in the area to be harvested. From the tower, a cable leads to a landing below. The cable is attached to trees along the way by block-and-tackle, and the cut trees are transported via the cable to the landing.

Selective logging is more labor-intensive than clearcutting. That’s both good and bad news. The good news is that more people will be put to work, the bad news is that it will raise the price of lumber considerably.

Increased prices, however, will make B.C.’s forest industry less competitive which, in turn, will probably result in layoffs.

Switching to selective logging also requires large capital expenditures. To amortize those expenditures, the companies will have to increase their cut. The problem is that annual allowable cuts are being reduced year after year.

The aforementioned scenarios all assume that the industry wants genuine change, the kind of change demanded for years by environmentalists. The industry’s collective heart, however, may not be that pure.

To minimize the losses resulting from the changeover to selective logging, MacBlo may try to be more selective than is healthy for the forests. In other words, the company may try to highgrade, harvest only the most valuable timber, leaving the less valuable trees standing.

Then there are the safety concerns. Not all areas lend themselves to safe selective logging.

"We have not found very safe ways of doing selective logging in old-growth forests," says Forests Minister David Zirnhelt. "That’s not to say it can’t be done but we haven’t proven it."

I don’t want to subject the environmentalists to an unnecessarily cold shower, but I’d caution them to postpone their victory party for a spell.

TALK ABOUT CRASS POLITICAL MOTIVES

Details

Hits: 761

By HUBERT BEYER

VICTORIA – Condominium owners in the Lower Mainland and on Vancouver Island, on the hook for an estimated $1 billion to fix their leaky condos, are looking to the government for help, and what does the NDP do? Launch what they hope will be a political witch hunt.

There is no other way to interpret the appointment of former New Democrat premier Dave Barrett as one-man commissioner of inquiry to look into the leaky-condo mess.

The opposition, meanwhile, isn’t offering anything better. Liberal leader Gordon Campbell suggests the government sink Skeena Cellulose, take its money and reimburse the folks who got ripped off by fly-by-night condo developers.

All of which makes me suspect that the combined intelligence quotient of government and opposition equals that of a tadpole.

First, allow me to tear a strip or two off the government. Does Premier Glen Clark really want to make us believe Barrett’s appointment stems from a genuine desire to find a solution to the leaky-condo question?

The appointment has "get-Campbell" written all over it. Most of the Lower Mainland condos in question were built when Campbell was mayor of Vancouver. It is also no secret that a lot of developers are friends of Campbell who have contributed to his election campaign.

That, however, should not be at the centre of the government’s attempts to find a solution for the condo purchasers who got burned. But it is, as can easily be seen from a response last week in the legislature by Municipal Affairs Minister Jenny Kwan to a question by Campbell, who blasted the government for not having dealt with the matter earlier.

"I think it’s very curious that the Liberal opposition leader points the finger everybody else, excepting the people who him (financial) support," the minister said.

In his role as inquiry commissioner, Barrett has quasi-judicial powers. He can call witnesses, subpoena them is necessary, and attach blame. And if he feels like it, hue could call Campbell as a witness.

Now to the Liberals. Where were they all these years? The leaky-condo scandal didn’t just surface last week. The fact is that they avoided the issue like the plague, because of the potential harm it could do to their leader, if the government wanted to exploit it.

Only when they could no longer look the other way, did the Liberals unfurled the banner in support of the beleaguered condo owners. And their fears were confirmed: the government is, indeed, determined to use the issue for crass political purposes.

What about the central question: should the owners of leaky condos, whose repair bills range from $15,000 to $150,000, be entitled to government help?

I don’t want to appear uncharitable, but I’d say that under no circumstances should the taxpayer foot the bill for what is basically a question of buyer-beware.

You can clamor for tighter regulations and stricter inspections, but when all is said and done, when you buy something and there’s no guarantee, you’re on the hook.

Most frame-construction condos are built by non-union outfits with cheap labor. Maybe the construction trade unions have a point when they warn consumers to make sure that a development is union-built. It’s more expensive, but has a better chance of not being built shoddily.

So what could Barrett possibly recommend when he brings down his report? Low-interest, government-guaranteed loans might be one possibility. A fund into which all builders have to pay and from which homeowners, who got ripped off, would be reimbursed, is another, although that wouldn’t work retroactively.

Considering the mean-spirited manner in which the government launched the initiative, and the reluctance of the opposition to touch this hot potato until they could, no longer ignore it, however, I wouldn’t hold my breath for a practical solution if it rained into my condo.

NDP PLANS TO SLASH PARKS SERVICES

Details

Hits: 1082

VICTORIA – Thinking of going on a camping trip through beautiful British Columbia this summer? Better take along a trailer with firewood.

To minimize its continuing budget shortfalls, the Glen Clark government plans to trim $750,000 from the parks branch budget.

In practical terms, that would mean campers will no longer find firewood at many provincial campsites. There will be fewer garbage pickups and less maintenance.

Larger campsites would probably continue to be supplied with firewood. But smaller campgrounds and picnic sites would not. In some cases, fire pits would be removed.

Now, you may have noticed I said the government "plans" to set this idiotic scheme in motion. From a few phone calls I made, it appears that second thoughts are crossing the minds of our esteemed Cathy McGregor, minister of environment, lands and parks.

The first rumblings of the parks budget slashing I heard came from Helmut Giesbrecht, the NDP MLA for Skeena. Giesbrecht was not a happy camper. He had just survived a recall campaign when he was blind-sided with this one.

Three parks near Terrace, he found out, were no longer to be supplied with firewood. Phone calls from the Terrace Standard newspaper, from angry parks operators and ticked-off constituents were the last thing Giesbrecht needed. He told me the decision was contrary to what he was told by bureaucrats last fall.

Needless to say, he made some phone calls and expressed his views on the matter with some gusto. When I called the parks branch, I was told by a communications person that everything was speculation and premature.

The minister would probably be making an announcement next week. Could she put me on the list of people to be notified if and when the minister made the announcement?

I asked how long that list was – a couple of thousand? Was it really just speculation or was the government back-tracking? "Now, now," she replied.

But back-tracking is obviously what the government is doing. I’m not surprised. Giesbrecht wasn’t the only one to express his extreme displeasure over the issue. Carol and Jim Glen, operators of Kleanza Creek provincial park, near Terrace, told the parks branch to take their job and shove it.

"I just think it’s ridiculous," Carol said. She particularly objected to the removal of firewood from parks. "Now people can't even take their kids for a wiener roast," she said.

A sure indication that the reduction of services in provincial parks had been a done deal until the cries of protest arose, were some quotes by Denis O’Gorman, assistant deputy minister of parks.

"We’re not doing this because it’s our first preference. But it’s essential in terms of budget management." He added that "we’ll be seeking a lot of acceptance, patience and understanding from our visitor public."

Right, Denis. I can just hear those campers looking for firewood speak with warm affection, understanding and patience of the government, as they huddle around a bloody Coleman stove.

I’m planning a two-week camping trip in the Chilcotin, but I can tell the minister right now I’m taking my vacation money to Hawaii if there’s no firewood in all campgrounds.

Of all the dumb things this government has done over the years, this one stands out for its singular stupidity.

Just a few weeks ago, the premier made a big thing of adding 1,500 campsites over the next two years. And then he wants to save money by eliminating firewood from campgrounds.

If the minister hasn’t already decided that it was a stupid idea that should be deep-sixed, she had better think again before going ahead with her ludicrous money-saving scheme.