Skip to content
Join our Newsletter

Letters Oct. 25: Old-growth forests, impact of federal election

Stop old-growth destruction Re: “Why is a B.C. government agency violating old-growth logging rules?” Oct. 20. Say it isn’t so.
a14-1025-clearcut.jpg
A logging road runs through a clearcut near Port Alberni. Letter-writers suggest the government government should investigate more fully the extent to which B.C. Timber Sales is in violation of the province’s policies on old growth.

Stop old-growth destruction

Re: “Why is a B.C. government agency violating old-growth logging rules?” Oct. 20.

Say it isn’t so. There are recommendations created precisely to protect old-growth forests and achieve biodiversity targets … and we aren’t enforcing them?

Come on! Put a stop to the logging of these vibrant old-growth trees and forests.

We should be kneeling before them in gratitude for the benefits they bring to us and our planet … not turning a blind eye to their destruction.

It is past time to act.

Starr McMichael
Cordova Bay

Timber violations should be dealt with

Re: “Why is a B.C. government agency violating old-growth logging rules?” Oct. 20; “The old-growth logging showdown,” Sept. 1.

I was dismayed to read two Times Colonist articles describing B.C. Timber Sales’ apparent practice of violating the principles of old-growth management plans.

The Oct. 20 article mentions two investigations that conclude that B.C. Timber Sales “is not complying with rules designed to ensure sufficient old-growth forest is retained to avoid loss of biodiversity.”

These investigations focused primarily on the clearcutting underway in the Nahmint Valley near Port Alberni. However, it gives rise to the question of whether these practices are occurring elsewhere in the province.

It’s ironic that the articles bring up this issue, given the government’s July 2019 announcement of a first step in a new approach to old-growth management. In this announcement, Forests Minister Doug Donaldson said: “We want to protect these majestic giants so today’s families and future generations can enjoy them, just like our parents and grandparents did.”

I urge the government to investigate more fully the extent to which B.C. Timber Sales is in violation of the province’s policies and Vancouver Island’s Land Use Plan.

If violations are found to have been occurring, I would expect the government to deal with them and take steps to prevent future occurrences.

Alec Lee
View Royal

Laurel Collins’ victory costly for city

Victorians are now on the hook for a byelection to the tune of an eye-watering $200,000 to replace a single councillor, Laurel Collins, who completed only a quarter of her elected mandate.

Considering that Collins opposed Victorians paying $10,000 to celebrate veterans until public blowback forced an apology from her, I wonder who she thinks should compensate us for the cost of her blatant political opportunism.

As a benchmark, the city received a paltry $250,000 for low-income housing from Abstract Development to build 67 per cent more density than allowed by the official community plan for 1201 Fort St., where the nine townhomes are listed for $1.7 million each, plus all the units in the two condo buildings.

Anthony Danda
Victoria

No representation for Island in federal cabinet

Regarding the NDP and Green wins on Vancouver Island: Congratulations! What have you won? Nothing again — same as last time. If you are not a member of government with representation at the federal cabinet table, you get nothing for your voters — again! Do you really think Trudeau needs the NDP’s help to govern?

Some day, you NDP and Green voters will figure it out. I wish I could say it’s complicated.

Jim Laing
Saanich

First-past-the-post a parody of democracy

Once again, our first-past-the-post system has shown how outrageous it is with regard to representation of the popular will. It’s a parody of democracy.

The Conservatives got more votes than the Liberals, but considerably fewer seats. The Conservatives got 34.4 per cent of the votes but only 121 seats, while the Liberals got 33 per cent of the vote yet 157 seats.

The NDP got more than twice the number of votes than the Bloc, with the NDP at 15.9 per cent and the Bloc at 7.7 per cent, yet the Bloc with 32 seats got a lot more than the NDP’s 24. The Greens at 6.5 per cent got nearly as many votes as the Bloc, but only a miserable three seats.

This is manifestly unfair and damaging to democracy, voter engagement and faith in the system. And that’s without discussion of strategic voting resulting from the first-past-the-post system, which causes many supporters of smaller parties to vote for their second choices, skewing things even farther.

Jagmeet Singh inexplicably hasn’t listed proportional representation as a priority demand for supporting a minority Liberal government. It would permanently change the game so that all the other priorities he and other progressives have listed will stand a chance long term.

Proportional representation has historically resulted elsewhere in more representative government and a greater impetus for parties to collaborate. Surely that’s what most of us want after the nasty campaign we’ve just had.

Rob Garrard
Victoria

Polarization will only weaken Canada

The federal election results have clearly shown that Canada is a highly divided nation that seems to have lost its way.

Think about it — the climate-change challenge has become so politicized that finding practical long-term solutions is becoming almost impossible and the hypocrisy is beyond belief.

Regions are battling each other without considering national implications. Families are struggling and our health-care system is at a breaking point.

Students are being crushed by debt and young families cannot afford to buy a home. Seniors are finding it more difficult (after saving over a lifetime) to makes ends meet.

Our federal and provincial debt levels are spinning out of control.

The media does not provide balanced and fair reporting, which provides fuel for the polarized debate.

Ottawa is completely out of touch with the fears and concerns of families across this country and panders to special interest groups with the loudest voice.

We need to find common-sense solutions to national issues that are based on respectful and balanced dialogue and compromise.

As a nation, we are moving toward a more polarized country (like our neighbours to the south) that will only weaken the best country in the world. So, let’s try to understand each other by listening and demand our political leaders deliver balanced and dynamic leadership based on integrity.

For the sake of future generations, let’s keep the process of building Canada in a positive and respectful manner and stop the polarized path that we seem to be following.

Stephen Morison
Nanaimo

Say hello to division, massive debt

Driving home after the election, I heard a re-elected NDP MP from Vancouver being interviewed on CBC Radio. He named a long list of spending priorities his party had and would seek now that they held the balance of power in parliament.

Of course, the interviewer gave him a free pass on how he intended to pay for these initiatives, which would significantly inflate the current deficit, particularly given the NDP ambition to kill the Trans Mountain pipeline twinning, as well as the oil and gas industry, one of the major wealth generators in this country.

With this very dangerous combination of spending as well as killing the industry to which Canada owes must of its prosperity, it struck me that we are saying goodbye to wealth creation in this country and hello to a divided country with massive debt and a very troubled future, should the NDP plans materialize. It’s funny, though, how the NDP gets away with only talking about one side of the equation while hoodwinking their supporters with the fantasy that everything they promise is “free.”

Where do I sign up?

G.K. Schick
Victoria

Send us your letters

• Email: letters@timescolonist.com

• Mail: Letters to the editor, Times Colonist, 2621 Douglas St., Victoria, B.C. V8T 4M2.

Letters should be no longer than 250 words and may be edited for length, legality or clarity. Include your full name, address and telephone number. Copyright of letters or other material accepted for publication remains with the author, but the publisher and its licensees may freely reproduce them in print, electronic and other forms.