Guest editorial by Peter Baird
The guest editorial in last week’s paper does not provide a fair or balanced portrayal of Canfor’s harvesting plans in the Clearwater Valley.
Mr. Goward asks for an open public discussion to set social, economic and environmental priorities for the Valley but misses the fact that a public discourse on land use for this area has already happened.
That process was clear that the region wants both a healthy environment and an economy that includes high-paid manufacturing jobs. While some areas were set aside by the public as protected areas, the area we are planning harvesting operations in was not.
We respect the land use objectives set through public processes. Said another way, we rely on these processes to set a balanced vision for the economy that takes broad objectives into account and a landscape level view of the environment, rather than a piecemeal approach. It is easy to advocate for outright protection small area by small area, but this approach doesn’t take big-picture objectives – or consequences – into account.
The capacity of our Vavenby mill is matched to the annual sustainable harvest level that has been set for the region. That is not to say that our mill isn’t viable, but that in order to be viable, we need to carry out our harvesting plans based on that land use planning process. Suddenly and arbitrarily making major changes to land use would jeopardize our mill.
There are some who want to see no harvesting at all, and they are surely entitled to their views. But these views must be balanced with other members of the community, including the 175 people who work at our mill, the hundreds more who conduct our harvesting operations and everyone in the Valley that benefits from the $54 million a year that we inject into the local economy.
The upside is that there is no reason a sustainable forest sector, a healthy environment and a world-class tourism industry can’t coexist. The assertion that a sustainable, renewable resource operation will decimate the tourism sector is false. Visitors are sophisticated enough to know that lumber, paper and green energy are natural products that come from trees and that trees grow back – and if they don’t know that, we should view it as an opportunity for education.
The purpose of land use planning is to find ways to accommodate all uses, not one land use or one industry at the exclusion of the other.
Whether or not to allow forest harvesting to support manufacturing in the economy is not a discussion for Canfor to have with the Wells Gray Action Committee – we are clearly two local stakeholders with opposing views on this issue. It is a question for the broader community, and the answer has been given in the form of current land use plans.
Our harvesting operations respect that community vision. Canfor is focused on is creating solid, science-based plans to ensure our operations meet the highest standards in the areas designated for sustainable forestry. We work hard to address specific concerns that are raised regarding planned harvesting operations and we have undertaken extensive analyses using professional hydrologists, biologists and terrain stability experts.
Once all of this research and information can be incorporated by our professional foresters into a harvesting plan, we will host an open house to present those plans to the community, answer questions and seek feedback.
We also have an open door policy and welcome input from the public as we continue to work to deliver balanced plans that reflect environmental, social and economic values.
– Author Peter Baird is general manager for forest planning with Canfor.