Ne

 

“Are they really concerned about water quality,”
Malone wonders, “if their staff has no hydrologists or
ecologists, but a whole bunch of foresters?” Her claim is
somewhat unfounded—the panel of GVRD speakers at the
consultation included a biologist, geologist, ecologist,
and entomologist. These were just a few of the scientists
hired to complete the six-year ecological inventory.

he danger with logging is that it causes
"Ties in the natural flow of water and

exposes the watershed soil. Once logged,
there are fewer canopies to filter rain water and
snow melt so exposed soil quickly fills our
reservoirs and-drinking water. As debris travels
into our water pipes, it releases bacteria and
pathogens, creating a need for higher
concentrations of chlorine to fight these bacteria.
Excessive chlorine in tap water is why many
Vancouverites—including people at the GVRD—are
purchasing bottled water.

: uthor William Koop’s critique, Misinforming the

ss

Public, gives a scientific analysis on the effects of

GVRD's “managing” in the watersheds. He explains
that since they've logged 5000 hectares of plantations,
they've created 5000 hectares of land more prone to
forest fires.

The GVRD claims that many of these areas were logged
because canopies of the same height have a greater
chance of catching fire. They take responsibility for their
clear cutting and all the other controversial decisions
made in the past, and suggest the ecological inventory
and public forums are being done to find new, more
acceptable ways, to manage our watersheds.

Why not stop logging all together? Hunt explains the
GVRD already has a 999 year lease with the province to
“deal” with these lands, and as part of the agreement, a
Management Plan must be submitted to the Ministry of
Forests. “I, personally, don’t have a problem with getting
out of any agreement requiring us to log,” assures Hunt,
“Since 1991 we've been formulating a 200 year
Management Plan. In the first year, we can get out of the
Amending Indenture, but a plan is needed for the rest of
the 199 years.”

he GVRD’s efforts to include public opinion in the
"Tisssommain process should be given credit, not
criticism. What more can we ask for than to be

ete aiiene es: yoo sesnoassannntacennionenitonstenssmnonsanasonstaanscsstnesca eatenaineonnmeh

 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
   
  

heard? Why decide what the outcome will be when the
decision-making process hasn't even begun? “I would be
flabbergasted if politicians decided we should start
logging the watersheds on a commercial scale. They know
this is not in the public’s best
interest,” says Morrel.

n People and
0 Places, Scott .
, Hanna, Manager

of Acres International
.for Environmental
ervices, literally
ook notes while
listening to the

_ public’s concerns
egarding the GVRD’s
past practices. When
Hunt was asked what he

_ learned from coming to the
forum he replied, “What I’m
hearing is the need to have different groups get together,
share their information, and come up with a solution
that’s going to work.”

Fst ben are not displaying the same

 

attitude. Even though guests were given a twenty-

minute question and answer period after each
presentation during the consultation, most
environmentalists barely gave the GVRD a chance to
speak. One environmentalist wasn’t even happy when he
was given a chance to speak. “Thank-you for your
indulgence,” he said sarcastically after being thanked for
his patience.

Maybe Hanna’s note-taking or Hunt's hope to learn
from the public is all a sham, or some sort of political
stunt, but instead of deciding what their motives are,
shouldn't we be focusing on our watersheds?

efore you decide whether the GVRD is the scum of
B the earth or the gatekeeper of our precious water,

contact them by phone, fax or e-mail and give
them your opinion on the issue.

Phone: 432-6339

Fax: 432-6399
Email: comm_ed@GVRD.be.ca

June 1999 the Other Press page 10

ee

Be