Two Dozen Resolutions From Weekend Conference

Sunday, November 05, 2006 06:12 PM

"People left the Stand Up for the North Conference with a positive attitude" says conference organizer Peter Ewart.

The two day conference wrapped up with at least 24 draft resolutions. "It was getting late in the day when the conference wrapped" says Ewart, "So the organizing committee agreed to meet this Thursday to set the time and date for a larger meeting of all those who took part in the conference and anyone else who would like to attend, so we can focus on fine tuning each and every resolution".

A transcript of the entire conference should be ready in a couple of weeks, and as the final report is prepared, so will an action plan to deal with the resolutions.

The object is to keep moving forward says Ewart who says the conference produced a growing spirit that northerners can come together and bring about change. "It seems to me there was a desire to have more say in the decisions about what is happening in the forest and with the revenues, and that was a feeling that was expressed regardless of one's position on the political spectrum."

Here are some of the draft resolutions which will be up for further discussion:

Urge the Provincial government to work with value added and small and medium scale forestry and lumber operations to change forest tenure policies, remove beureaucratic obstacles, adjust stumpage rates to encourgae small operations and improve access to suitable timber.
Provincial government reinvest in the forest service and increaase the number of research and oversight personnel
The Stand Up for the North Committee apporoach CNC, UNBC, FIrst Nations, labour, business town and municipal councils, regional districts and community organizations to organize and take part in a stumpage symposium to look at stumpage callculations and revenue as well as possible revenue sharing with theprovincial government
Province enact selective and other harvesting practices that best maintain the forests, the understory and environment
Dollars from the MOuntain Pine Beetle Action Plan be used to set up new forestry action committees at the community level
Reforestation be based on up-to-date scientific and ecologically sound planning to develope sustainable diverse and product forests for current and future generations
Forest tenure policies be adjusted to favour forest companies are based in this region, are committed to the communities, reinvest in the in their operations in the region, and in value added wood and forestry operations
Duties returned to companies in the region be reivested in existing operations and especially new value added and secondary wood operations
Province fund research and develop a plan to store large amounts of beetle wood logs in appropriate lakes
Support moving the forest industry away from market forces, and towards the sustainability of forests, community and the environment
Addressing social infrastructure needs to be an integral part of both short and long term planning
Province work with the affected regions to arrive at a clear estimate of the cost of the pine beetle infestation on the forest, economies and communities and increase the funding to thos comunities accordingly
COlleges and Universities in beetle affected regions be granted further funding to broaden education and training programs to meet the needs of those who will be displace because of the beetle impact
Support for the First Nations to achieve aboriginal title and rights as well as revenue sharing with the provincial government regarding forest and other natural resources
Provincial and Federal Governments provide funding and resources to clear the dead forest from around northern First Nations and non-First Nations communities to create a 2 km buffer for fire safety
Support for First Nations to be more involved and employed in all aspects of the forest industry
Province change legislation to allow communities to develop community energy systems and the ability to sell excess power to the BC Hydro grid
Ministry of Forests head office be re-located to Prince George
Committee be formed comprising of all groups currently working on pine beetle action plans with a view to develop one common vision and one common goal.

"There is still a lot of work to do" says Peter Ewart and the meeting coming up this week will help define the next steps.

Previous Story - Next Story

Email |

Print |

Facebook |

Twitter |

Digg |

Del.icio.us

Posted on Sunday, November 05, 2006 06:12 PM in News by 250 News

Return to Home

Comments

Posted by: owl on November 5 2006 11:48 PM

forest, forest, forest, forest ....... I am afraid that is all I see in the article above.

I was not there. However, it looks from the outside that this is not a stand up for the north group, but a stand-up for the northern forest extraction group.

That is far too selective from my point of view.

It looks like we will shortly be on a modern day transportaion route which improves our access to market.

Support the continuing modernization of forest based harvesting, silviculture and manufacturing industry by all means. However, that industry is working with fewer and fewer direct employees each decade as we modernize and stay competitive.

Apply that thinking to other areas of manufacturing and services, where resources might be more dependent on quality of water, quality of education, quality of infrastructure, quality of life, living affordability, etc.

Take the forest blinders off. Look around at what other competitive communities have done and are doing.

This "forum" has to move in other directions as well.

Posted by: paladin on November 6 2006 9:59 AM

I agree one hundred percent owl. With the younger demographic coming into the area it would be nice to make this part of the world and PG itself more user friendly. Kelowna has opened up another park with lovely clean gravel trails where one can feel safe and enjoy walking your dog. Their downtown continues to thrive and it's easy to get around the city and find a little spot to just sit and take a breather. Speaking of which, gosh this town really stinks, I would not be caught jogging or exercising and inhaling whatever particulates are floating around. You can even smell it indoors! I agree with some of the resolutions as well, but it looks like a lot of folks can't see the trees for the forests.

Posted by: kimbo on November 6 2006 10:03 AM

It was a go too meeting Owl, go to the federal, go to the provincial, go to First Nations and on and on.

Why didnt they go to Canfor, go to Brink, go to Winton that could mean a new direction. But what is happening is again we are going off in one direction of looking for government aid.

It will be interesting to see in which direction the newly appointed Omineca Beetle Action Coalition will take. Probably more studies.

Cheers

Posted by: owl on November 6 2006 10:28 AM

Kimbo, what a great term "go to meeting".

I think there may be things to go to the government for once we have determined what the problem is and how we may be able to fix it.

If this is to be a made in the North solution, we have to come up with better ways than to separate the north from the south, moving government money in this direction, etc. as being the panacea.

When it comes to maintaining and increasing infrastructure, as in putting an investment into this part of the province, then most certainly. Improving ports, whether sea or air, and transportation systems is certainly a requirement, since they are the lifeline of any community. Always has been that way since people settled into an agricultural society and will continue that way until we have figured out how we can get along without moving all those goods around by building local and smaller goods producing capacity at competitive costs. That day may very well come which may see abandoned transportation infrastructure, but not in my lifetime. If we find good alternate energy sources which can power transportation systems once oil gets too expensive, even my children may not see that day.

So, one of the opportunities to be included in a search for diversification is to close some loss of opportunity practices. I think it is worthwhile exploring identifying those industries and businesses which can operate at a profit locally and combine that with a buy local campaign.

What does it take to grow key vegetables, such as tomatoes, locally under glass, for instance, powered by geothermal, wind, even biomass energy?

Posted by: flowerchild on November 6 2006 2:05 PM

Hey Owl, why would anyone go to the bother to set up a conference, all they would have to do to save time and money is to sit down and talk to you for an hour or six.....175 people should have stayed at home and just waited for your report!

Posted by: thunder1 on November 6 2006 7:17 PM

Maybe you jerks should attend a meeting such as Stand-Up before you criticize the people and the outcome.

Posted by: thunder1 on November 6 2006 7:34 PM

Maybe you jerks should attend a meeting such as Stand-Up before you criticize the people and the outcome. I did and could not believe the quality of information provided - although necessarily condensed. Speakers were from all walks of life and were remarkable. I felt that the industry rep. and the enviromentalist were not given due respect but other than that it was a well-balanced event. The conference fell short in not emphasizing a holistic approach to building sustainable communities - but this is a start.
Acknowledging the downside (to accelerated logging or uplift)is the first step to admitting that we must be aware of the negative impacts of over consumption and under utilization; depleting our environment is like sawing off a limb behind us. The approach must consider people, environment and economics in a long term context all-the-while striving to provide the present day standard of living. I am amazed at the intelligence of my neighbours and am in awe of their passion.

Posted by: owl on November 7 2006 9:33 AM

"Maybe you jerks "

Do you resort to such personal attacks in your daily life thunder1?

Posted by: owl on November 7 2006 10:55 AM

Thunder1, I decided to spend a few minutes on addressing your point of view about attending a meeting before addressing the outcome.

Most people attend very few meetings, yet they comment on the outcome. That is the norm for those who are interested in what happens around them and are interested in participating. Participation takes place in many different ways.

Just think of all the work done by the various committees in any community ... think of the reports that are prepared as a result of people meeting .... yet there are many who will criticize the outcomes of the meetings and reports which they did not participate in .. that is the norm. This site attests to that.

If each of us participates in 0.1% of the meetings and reports which go on that affect some or all of our lives, we are doing great. Does that mean we should not have an opinion about the outcome of them? I do not think so. Neither does every single person on here who responds to an article about the outcome of a meeting or report or an opinion and says "no way", or "right on", or whatever.

Being there is not a requirement of having an opinion about what went on there. In fact, I view it as an objective outside opinion, rather than a subjective inside opinion. That is why we have people who let us know what happened. Why else would we care if we cannot have opinions and voice them. Why should only those 175 or so who attended have a voice and only through the meeting? Why write reports about the meeting? People who were there know what happened.

Participation does not stop at the door of a room and does not stop when the meeting is over. Meetings such as this one encourage debate. With debate there will be a better chance of a good product coming from it. Not mine, not yours, but everyone's.

As to the quality of the information provided at ANY meeting, that is in the eyes of the beholder as well. What might be high quality to one individual, may not be high quality to another, whatever you feel "quality" actually means.

In the case of new information, it may be new to some, it may be old hat to others, and to others still, it may be wrong information, or insufficient information in their opinions.

Such meetings are always difficult since every single person in the room has a different level of knowledge about the topic as well as a different opinion about the topic. Some will be bored, others will have difficulty understanding parts or all of it.

I have not got the faintest clue about what you may or may not know about steps forest companies are taking to ensure that they have product left to feed the investment in plants that they have made and continue to make. They are not about to abandon this part of the world.

One of those steps is to ensure that they have a product that they can sell. These days that means they have to work in a "transparent" fashion to show to their clients that they are practicing Sustainable Forest Management.

If you have not seen what that means to how local companies operate, click on the link below, and look at the SFM plan for TFL 30 and the PG TSA as well as latest annual plan. The process is not perfect, but it is a major step in the right direction when compared to the process of even just 10 years ago.

http://www.canfor.com/sustainability/certification/csa.asp