From 2-4pm yesterday with roughly 40 people in attendance which included former BC Forests Minister David Zirnhelt and the Cariboo RD Directors for Areas D and F (D.Bischoff/J. Sorley) and their Alternate Directors (S.Forseth/J.Darney) - the local Horsefly, Big Lake, and Miocene Working Group updated those in attendance as to the following:
a) History of Community Forest Legislation in BC
b) History of WL Community Forest since 2006
c) Update on April faciliated meeting at 150 Mile House - done by Fraser Basin Council
d) Update on June meeting at Esler
e) Conditions for Support (4)
f) Next Steps
Those in attendance agreed that the Working Group be authorized to send a letter to BC's current Forests Minister (Hon. Steve Thomson) with copies to City of Williams Lake/WL Indian Band, local MLA's and the media that it doesn't support the WL Community Forest in its' current form. In addition, those in attendance agreed to back, in principle, the 4 conditions of support for the Williams Lake Community Forest as suggested by Cariboo RD Area 'F' Director Joan Sorley which included:
a) More rural representation on the Board of Directors for the WL Community Forest Limited Partnership
b) More rural reps on the Standing Committee on Resource Values
c) 3% of gross revenue from the Community Forest go to rural communities, based on impact on individual communities
Steve's own take:
One can't but sympathize with those who attended yesterday's meeting when some suggested that perhaps civil disobedience be considered, move purchasing decisions to Quesnel/Kamloops and maybe even consider legal proceedings, if the Community Forest is approved in roughly a year from now. I completely understand the Working Group and their local communities' frustration around the proponents' inability to sit down with these communities and work out a solution that is a "win-win" for all involved... As I explained to Director Bischoff late yesterday, it is my opinion that the currently proposed WL Community Forest is a classic example of what the community forest legislation did not intend and the process used to date demonstrates precisely how not to develop a community forest for rural communities
Personally - I fail to understand why the proponents of this Community Forest could not even send their Staffs to yesterday's meeting, if for no other reason but to take notes and inform Mayor Cook and her City Council & Chief Ann Louie and her Band Council about the continuing concerns with the financial/governance structure of this proposed Community Forest. The City of WL/WL Indian Band have now transmitted formally their Community Forest application on August 23rd which the Ministry of Forests, Lands and NRO will do their own review and it is expected by next summer,the Ministry will decide if the proponents will get a Community Forest at Big Lake/Esler.
As we go further along in this process - it becomes abundantly clear that the proposed WL Community Forest lacks the 'social license' to proceed for previously mentioned reasons and should be rejected by Steve Thomson and his Staff and furthermore - the people of Big Lake should be directly invited to reapply for a Community Forest License and the City of Williams Lake be informed that a community forest license will be reserved for rural communities only...
Finally - Cariboo RD Area 'D' Director Deb Bischoff and I reviewed today's meeting and she will discussing the outcome of this meeting with the identified communities in the WL Community Forest Business Plan within Area D at yesterday's meeting which includes Wildwood, Pine Valley, and Fox Mountain. My guess is that they are unaware that they are able to apply for the 'net community benefit' from the WL Community Forest. Morally speaking - only those communities impacted (ie: Big Lake/Miocene/Horsefly) should be allowed access to the community benefit of the WL Community Forest
No comments:
Post a Comment