Editor, The Times:
The letter from Peter Baird of Canfor (Times, July 17) must have been composed by a corporate P.R. expert, since it attempts to conjure images of the company being “respectful” and “engaging”.
I have sent two letters to the Canfor-Vavenby planning and forestry department, the first on April 28 and, when there was no reply, a second one on June 2, which so far has not elicited a reply either. Both letters explained that, as a landowner at the foot of Trophy Mountain, I was concerned about the potential damage to my water supply.
I have 11 years of hydrological data about the flow volumes of Shook Brook, since I have been licenced by BC Hydro as an independent power producer since 2003. Mr. Baird refers to consultants conducting hydrologic assessments, yet nobody from Canfor has asked to see my data, which would be far superior to their probable cursory glance at Shook Brook.
With the communication barrier that Canfor has created so far, I certainly do not feel engaged in Mr. Baird’s planning process for Upper Clearwater. It seems to be impossible to find out what the current harvesting plan actually entails and how it could affect the many landowners below Trophy Mountain. If Canfor is really being “respectful of the Guiding Principles” (a legally-binding document, according to my lawyer), the company would not be behaving in such a secretive manner.
Roland Neave
Kamloops, B.C.