Myths and Facts about the Working Forest Initiative
Stan Hagen is the Minister of Sustainable Resource Management, charged with the "Working Forest Initiative" portfolio.
Myth: The Working Forest has nothing to do with privatization
Fact: Stan Hagen, Minister of Sustainable Resource Management, has repeatedly stated that the Working Forest Initiative has nothing to do with privatization. This is simply false. The discussion paper reveals that it will make it easier to sell-off provincial forestlands by eliminating the Ministry of Forests and Land and Water BC (a Crown corporation) from the decision making process in most cases, leaving the Ministry of Sustainable Resource Management as the sole decision-maker. "Generally, the Minister of Sustainable Resource Management or senior regional ministry officials will have authority for decisions to withdraw land from the Working Forest for conversion to private land...".
However, current legislation forbids selling provincial forestlands for forestry alone (logging and then using the land for real estate subdivisions is permitted, however). But legislation can be changed. TimberWest's Chief Executive Officer, Paul McElligott, and former National Bank of Canada financial analyst, Reid Carter, both say that the BC Liberal government is "sending strong signals" about a forthcoming sell-off of Crown forestlands to logging companies. On this topic, Carter noted that, "I have had many conversations with people in government, both elected and bureaucrats, who believe that privatization makes tremendous sense." Both say that the sell-off of public lands will likely come during the Liberal's second term, should they be re-elected. (Vancouver Sun, April 5, 2003).
Chief Stewart Phillip, President of the Union of BC Indian Chiefs, stated in a January 24, 2003 press release expressing opposition to "Working Forest" legislation, "Clearly, the Provincial Government has a legally enforceable duty to consult with First Nations people whenever their Aboriginal Title interests will be affected by any Crown decision concerning the allocation of land and resources within their respective traditional territories. Obviously, the sweeping allocation of some 45 million hectares of forest lands to corporate third-party interests is going to impact many, many First Nations' Aboriginal Title interests." Photo credit: Nick Seiflow
Myth: The Working Forest "will not limit negotiations with First Nations.”
Fact: The question is not whether government and First Nations can continue to meet and "negotiate", but rather whether the Working Forest will make it harder to reach a fair and just settlement as an outcome of negotiations. It will only compound First Nations' issues by creating an unwarranted "certainty" for industrial logging interests. Enhancing corporate certainty over BC's lands will make it more contentious, lengthy, and expensive for First Nations' to resolve land claims in their unceded territories.
Myth: New parks and protected areas can still be established in the Working Forest.
Fact: It's true the new law does not ban the establishment of new parks. However the planned obstructions and disincentives against new protected areas, such as Timber Targets, permanent logging zones, and enhanced compensation prices will be so great that it would be highly unlikely that any major forest areas would be protected in the future.
Myth: Existing parks and protected areas are safe under the Working Forest.
Fact: Asked by a Vancouver Sun reporter whether a new park might have to be compensated for by a land withdrawal from an existing park under the Working Forest Initiative, Minister Stan Hagen upon releasing his Working Forest proposal replied "That might be one way of doing it, but I'm not prepared to comment because we don't have the paper finished yet." (Vancouver Sun, Jan.23, 2003). Such a land swap mechanism is referred to as a "no net loss" provision, meaning that there can be no net loss of available timber for private logging companies. A month after this statement, in the face of a major public backlash, Minister Hagen wrote an opinion piece that vehemently denied that parks would be subject to a "no net loss" provision. Conservationists plan to hold the government to this promise.
Myth: The Working Forest will equally benefit all users, including the tourism industry. Thus, it is really a "Working Landscape."
Fact: The government has recently readjusted its public relations terminology due to the complaints of other industry sectors about government’s favouring of timber corporations. The government is also dangling a carrot in front of tourism operators in the form of expanded tourism tenures in the Working Forest. However, logging will still be permitted in the tourism tenures and there is no compensation given to tourism businesses when their scenic viewscapes and recreational landscapes are turned into stumps. In addition, the government plans to designate limited parcels of marginal forests as protected "tourism targets". However, tourism is often more dependent on the overall appeal of a greater region than on small parcels of designated "tourism lands" surrounded by clearcuts and logging roads. As a whole, rural tourism businesses will lose a net amount of their forested assets under Campbell's Working Forest.
