   |
      |
|
Hi Kim, Thank you for writing. Can you please explain what you mean by "green extreme groups"? I am an advocate of non-violent forms of civil disobedience, although I understand the anger and frustration that sometimes results in the vandalism of machinery and the exchange of angry words. In my opinion there is nothing "extreme" about efforts to protect those vulnerable creatures with whom we share the planet, and the planet itself, however I believe environmental activists are most successful when we refrain from any form of violence. I'm not sure what you mean when you suggest that "many of the green groups are extremely anti-worker". I have many contacts with environmental activists representing various different organizations, and I wouldn't describe any of them as "anti-worker". I'm not sure which "actions" you're speaking about. I certainly wouldn't describe the Western Canada Wilderness Committee as "anti-worker". On a journey into the Walbran Valley with the WCWC during 2002, I was pleased to have an opportunity to connect with representatives from the Youbou TimberLess Society (http://www.savebcjobs.com). Ken James was invited, by the WCWC, to speak to us about sustainable forestry alternatives. I know that Ken James (of the YTS) and Ken Wu (of the WCWC) are on friendly terms, and have spoken together a number of times. Are you familiar with the YTS? They're unemployed because the corporate forestry industry is more concerned about profits than they are about jobs. The Youbou Mill was shut down so the industry could move raw logs out of the province rather than employ local workers. The WCWC connected with the Youbou employees when they were still employees, and rallied with them in their efforts to save the mill from closure. I attended a rally in Duncan prior to the mill's closure, and the WCWC was represented there. This doesn't seem in any way "anti-worker", so I'm not sure what you're referring to when you suggest "WCWC has proven over the past decade to be perhaps the most consistently anti-worker green group in BC". Both the WCWC and the YTS advocate for local, community owned and regulated forestry that is selective about which logs are manufactured into violins and guitars, and which are used for other purposes. I am a pianist, and my father a carpenter, so I appreciate value-added wood products. I spent my high school years on an acreage in Alberta, and my family learned to appreciate and co-exist with the natural world. We wouldn't have survived many cold winters if we had cleared the land and burned everything in sight. From my understanding, the corporate forestry industry, of which the IWA is an integral part, doesn't care about anything except making as much money as possible, as fast as possible. It often chooses not to use its imagination as far as selective logging goes, it often denies that increased mechanization rather than environmentalists are responsible for the lack of forest jobs, and it denies itself opportunities to envision a sustainable future. I've heard from tree-planters that there are machines
that can travel in any terrain, even up steep mountain sides, to
clear anything from their path. I've also heard that out-dated equipment
was being sold to Brazil so they could ravage the tropical rainforests.
Only one person is required to drive a machine and plow down a forest,
whereas several people are required to identify and carefully remove
individual trees while leaving the rest of the forest intact. If
you're not familiar with Wildwood may I suggest that you tour a
wonderfully sustainable forest that has been successfully (not destructively)
logged for almost a century. You can find information about it at I understand that people feel the need to defend the organizations they align themselves with, and I see that you're a very devoted member of the IWA. As an individual, however, I ask that you have another look at what's really going on in the forests. I like to consider motivation. Sure, some mistakes have been made, it's definitely not nice to call people names and throw excrement, and many environmentalists have been victims of various forms of violence from representatives of a destructive industry. What has motivated this anger, and what's the best way to channel it constructively? For the sake of the children, and future generations, I think it's time that environmentalists and forestry workers consider workable options for the future. Multi-national corporations are fast becoming an entity of the past as community people reclaim the forests and empower themselves with sustainable, selective, community owned and operated logging practices. I hope that we are counting the days until the current premier resigns, his latest comments about there being more old-growth forest than there were 100 years ago reveal the extent of his psychological malady, however we can look to the federal government and reputable scientists for some guidance with regard to environmental ethics. The Canadian government has recently signed the Kyoto Accord (key-auto - single passenger vehicles contribute approximately 25% of greenhouse gases), and they're asking all of us to re-consider our present actions in light of the future. David Suzuki is offering a Nature Challenge, with very simple solutions that individuals can voluntarily participate with, so we can work towards a sustainable future for all earth's inhabitants. You can participate by going to http://www.davidsuzuki.org and selecting "Nature Challenge". I agree that this is a crucial time on the planet. Humans cannot continue to function as if the entire planet is nothing more than a collection of resources for them to use up as quickly as possible. We are blessed with a beautiful, fragile, blue-green planet that will care for us to the same extent that we care for her. It is definitely time for some changes, on many levels. I will be happy to contact Bill Routley, or any other IWA members if you want to pass along this note or provide their email addresses. Namaste, Janine |
|
