B.C. NDP Announce Plans to Cut 4,500 jobs and Stop Logging Across 26,000 Square Kilometers

[eyeball]

On 11/8/2021 at 10:11 AM, cougar said:

Stop this wining "killing jobs" nonsense!

It is called business transformation.  Those 4,500 loggers better start getting training classes to become electric vehicle manufacturers.

There will be transformation but there will always also be a demand for some old growth trees and at least some of it will still be met by 1st nations logging on treaty lands. They'll still be subject to provincial and federal regulations but they will not be subject to a ban on logging old-growth.  Indigenous rights to forestry will in all likelihood follow a path similar to that being established by indigenous fishermen.

[ironstone]

4500 jobs lost in BC. So this action won't lessen market demand and at the end of the day the lumber will have to come from somewhere. Kind of like the current oil and gas industry in Canada and the US. Both the Trudeau and Biden governments are strangling the oil and gas sector...but they have to still depend on outside sources for said oil and gas. At a greater cost of course.

The future target will be those same 4500 loggers that might be making electric cars. Electric cars also consume resources don't they?  Is the end goal to have all of us living in caves?

[cougar]

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

Indigenous rights to forestry will in all likelihood follow a path similar to that being established by indigenous fishermen.

I think, in all likelihood, soon there will be no forestry and no fishing, for there will be no trees and no fish left, and probably no roads either.

Indigenous logging outfits??  Never saw a successful one, but I have seen a demonstrably failed one. 

If they have rights before anyone else, I think they should be only allowed to use axes to bring down a tree and horses to haul the tree out of the forest with ropes made of whatever plants or animal skins they want.

As for fishing, again, they should have only canoes and spears, and again horses and carts to transport their catch.

Wonder if I should finish with my usual line again: The current system is totally F-d!

[eyeball]

3 hours ago, cougar said:

I think, in all likelihood, soon there will be no forestry and no fishing, for there will be no trees and no fish left, and probably no roads either.

The roads are already mostly gone around here, deactivated during the days of watershed restoration. Nothing but trees where the roads used to be now.  Sure makes it hard to scrounge firewood. I kinda miss the the old days when we'd just get the loader operator to line up a bunch of logs in the landing. 

Quote

Indigenous logging outfits??  Never saw a successful one, but I have seen a demonstrably failed one.

I know of a successful partnership in a successful community managed forest hereabouts - give it time. In the meantime I'm seeing some very successful looking indigenous fishing operations springing up in the wake of treaty settlements and supreme court victories.       

Quote

 

If they have rights before anyone else, I think they should be only allowed to use axes to bring down a tree and horses to haul the tree out of the forest with ropes made of whatever plants or animal skins they want.

As for fishing, again, they should have only canoes and spears, and again horses and carts to transport their catch.

 

They might go for that if we're likewise compelled to manage them with the same technology we had at time of 1st contact.  In the meantime some would like to go back to using weirs the way their ancestors did for a thousand years - until we came along and nearly managed these folks and their salmon into oblivion. Only took us a 100 years to do that.  

Quote

Wonder if I should finish with my usual line again: The current system is totally F-d!

You don't know the half of it and to finish with a typical line of my own, you haven't seen anything yet.

Edited December 16, 2021 by eyeball

[cougar]

22 hours ago, eyeball said:

You don't know the half of it and to finish with a typical line of my own, you haven't seen anything yet.

I like the way you respond.  Hope what I have not seen is something better; I always have that small 0.1% hope that things can be turned around so we go back to a more sustainable way of life and start to focus on happiness and personal achievements rather than materials things.

[Yzermandius19]

29 minutes ago, cougar said:

I like the way you respond.  Hope what I have not seen is something better; I always have that small 0.1% hope that things can be turned around so we go back to a more sustainable way of life and start to focus on happiness and personal achievements rather than materials things.

humanity has never lived a more sustainable way of life

going back to the pre-industrial era is far less sustainable

when do you think this mythical sustainable way of life was?

you have nostalgia for a society that never was

and this love of a fictious moment in human history

is what drives your resentment for the present

which is better than the past by several orders of magnitude

things get more sustainable all the time and yet you whine and bitch that isn't perfect

and have nostalgia for a far less sustainable time that you somehow believe was more sustainable?

fake environmentalists are total nut jobs, this is a prime example of that

Edited December 17, 2021 by Yzermandius19

[cougar]

15 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

humanity has never lived a more sustainable way of life

 

we've said all we had to say to each other.  move on

[Yzermandius19]

3 hours ago, cougar said:

we've said all we had to say to each other.  move on

you are free to move on

I am free to disregard your suggestion 

 

you are not entitled

to spew nonsensical garbage unchallenged

that is not how this forum works

welcome to the internet

learn to cope

 

if you want to spew nonsense unchallenged

go find a safe space

where everyone agrees with your nonsense

and no one will challenge you

otherwise

don't whine to me about someone challenging your bullshit

this ain't your safe space

Edited December 17, 2021 by Yzermandius19

[blackbird]

On 12/15/2021 at 3:24 PM, eyeball said:

There will be transformation but there will always also be a demand for some old growth trees and at least some of it will still be met by 1st nations logging on treaty lands. They'll still be subject to provincial and federal regulations but they will not be subject to a ban on logging old-growth.  Indigenous rights to forestry will in all likelihood follow a path similar to that being established by indigenous fishermen.

The forest industry has provided good-paying jobs for tens of thousands of B.C.ers  Sadly now, 18,000 will lose their jobs, and many may not be able to afford to keep their homes, and raise their families, properly.  They won't be able to switch to some other good-paying jobs easily because there are none.  The forest industry was it.  There are many towns in B.C. built strictly on the forest industry.  Government cannot simply kill that industry in an area and expect a new industry to just appear out the blue.  It doesn't work like that.  Most will probably receive unemployment cheques and may have to sell their homes, vehicles, etc. and move to who knows where.  When that runs out they will have to go on social assistance, but that is not enough to support families and pay for their mortgages.  So I don't know what will happen to those people.  A small number might be close to retirement age and be able to collect a pension.  Some small towns will probably die off because of the economy being killed in their area.  They are one industry towns.  The government proves they do not really put people first, but they listen to special interest groups like environmentalists and ignore the working people and general population of B.C.  They forgot one thing.  The NDP received much of their support from the union movement and the forest industry workers who they are now turning on savagely.  This may be why the NDP governments in B.C. have always been very short-lived, maybe a couple terms at the most and then decades in opposition.  I think we see why.  They seem bent on self destruction.  There is a BC Liberal MLA, Ellis Ross, who was a native chief councilor in the native Kitimaat Village, who has been running to become the next leader of the BC Liberal Party who strongly defends the resource industries (forestry, LNG, mining, pipelines, etc.) that the NDP government are hell bent on shutting down.  I believe he is getting a lot of support in his campaign for the leadership of the party but it closes at 5PM PST today.  If you are a BC resident and interested in supporting him, Google Ellis Ross Campaign and sign up for membership before 5PM PST today.  This will give you the right to vote on the next leader of the BC Liberal party in February.  I think he has a good chance of becoming the next Premier of B.C. and defeating the NDP.  He and his party will be able to reverse this law but it won't be for at least three years.

Edited December 17, 2021 by blackbird

[ironstone]

10 hours ago, cougar said:

I like the way you respond.  Hope what I have not seen is something better; I always have that small 0.1% hope that things can be turned around so we go back to a more sustainable way of life and start to focus on happiness and personal achievements rather than materials things.

Are there one or more specific examples of countries or smaller groups in the present day or the past that you feel Canada should try to emulate in terms of living in a sustainable fashion? Who is the ideal role model that you believe Canada should follow?

[eyeball]

6 hours ago, ironstone said:

Are there one or more specific examples of countries or smaller groups in the present day or the past that you feel Canada should try to emulate in terms of living in a sustainable fashion? Who is the ideal role model that you believe Canada should follow?

Speaking for myself I think Canada should have contracted out the management of our oil industry to Norway but I'd keep them as far away from our salmon as possible. As for logging Swedes look like they know how to make forests last and produce. They only have 1% of the world's commercially useful forests but produce 10% of the world's supply of lumber, pulp and paper.  Swedes also make great small forest equipment that would lend itself well to a Merv Wilkinson approach towards logging. There'll always be a place for a few big companies but there should be a large scattering of decentralized community tree farm licences and Mom and Pop managed woodlots throughout BC as well.   

 

 

[Nefarious Banana]

22 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Swedes look like they know how to make forests last and produce. They only have 1% of the world's commercially useful forests but produce 10% of the world's supply of lumber, pulp and paper.  Swedes also make great small forest equipment that would lend itself well to a Merv Wilkinson approach towards logging. There'll always be a place for a few big companies but there should be a large scattering of decentralized community tree farm licenses and Mom and Pop managed woodlots throughout BC as well.   

Small wood logging is alive and well in BC.  The Swedes have nothing to show us.  The few old growth cut blocks are getting all the news coverage and the fake environmentalists light their hair on fire . . . . while the cameras are rolling. BC is doing a good job with it's renewable resource.

ps. Merv was the joke around here.  Logging is more than felling a tree to make a picnic table and a set of wind chimes.

[Yzermandius19]

11 minutes ago, Nefarious Banana said:

Small wood logging is alive and well in BC.  The Swedes have nothing to show us.  The few old growth cut blocks are getting all the news coverage and the fake environmentalists light their hair on fire . . . . while the cameras are rolling. BC is doing a good job with it's renewable resource.

ps. Merv was the joke around here.  Logging is more than felling a tree to make a picnic table and a set of wind chimes.

nah BC is shitting the bed and caving to fake environmentalists

resulting in bad forest management, they need to cut down more trees in strategic locations

BC is simply getting away with having so many trees that the bad management doesn't hurt as much as it would if they had Sweden's resources

California is worse, the USFS used to be one best operating government agencies prior to 1970's, now it's among the worst

these forest fires ain't climate change related

it's bad forest management as demanded by the fake environmentalists related

Edited December 17, 2021 by Yzermandius19

[Nefarious Banana]

27 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

 BC is caving to fake environmentalists resulting in bad forest management, they need to cut down more trees in strategic locations.

BC is simply getting away with having so many trees that the bad management doesn't hurt as much as it would if they had Sweden's resources.

These forest fires aren't climate change related, it's bad forest management as demanded by the fake environmentalists related

Care to clarify your statements?

[cougar]

12 hours ago, ironstone said:

Are there one or more specific examples of countries or smaller groups in the present day or the past that you feel Canada should try to emulate in terms of living in a sustainable fashion? Who is the ideal role model that you believe Canada should follow?

You ask me to pick something good out of a bucket of stinky garbage?

[cougar]

19 hours ago, Yzermandius19 said:

you are free to move on

 

I have, by not reading your posts and not engaging you in any discussion.  I told you, one line replies to you are too much.  But this last - and absolutely last time, I will post more lines to have it all cleared.

1.  I do not like you avatar

2.  I do not like the clearly false statements you make

3.  I do not like the structure of your posts - that bullshit sequence of nonsense that goes on to the next line, then gets cut off and then continues on the next line

4. I get tired with you posting one stupid reply after another when there is absolutely no need to reply.

So any posts you make, whether you respond to me or anyone else, will be multiplied by 0 and never read.

P.S.  I do not like your username either.

Happy Holidays to you and bye bye

 

Edited December 18, 2021 by cougar

[Yzermandius19]

3 hours ago, cougar said:

1.  I do not like you avatar

you do not like Khabib Nurmagomedov?

terrible take

sit down

be humble

 

Edited December 18, 2021 by Yzermandius19

[ironstone]

12 hours ago, cougar said:

You ask me to pick something good out of a bucket of stinky garbage?

I was really curious if you were going to name a country that you thought was getting it right or if you were perhaps thinking more along the lines of some remote tribe somewhere in the world.

I think I mentioned before that we may not be in total disagreement about everything. I would like to see the pace of population growth really slow down for one thing.

[cougar]

15 minutes ago, ironstone said:

I was really curious if you were going to name a country that you thought was getting it right or if you were perhaps thinking more along the lines of some remote tribe somewhere in the world.

I think I mentioned before that we may not be in total disagreement about everything. I would like to see the pace of population growth really slow down for one thing.

Your read my mind about the tribes - yes the tribes in the Amazones or those in Papua New Guinea, if they still exist are the closest to sustainable styles of life but there come a dozen forum members to ridicule the statement.

We did not need to go that far.  We just had to think very hard about what we did with every substance / product we produced and how we recycled it to go back to its original ingredients.  We did not need so many different products made to fall apart in a few months so we return to the stores to buy new ones.  We needed to make products that last very long and could be repaired, to prevent further mining, logging, emissions from processing and pollution of the land.

We had to think about "growth" a lot harder. I believe most people, or at least a significant part of the population realize growth is not sustainable, but they are dragged along by the system, which cannot stop its growth.  The system knows that to stop its growth would be its death.

[Yzermandius19]

32 minutes ago, ironstone said:

I think I mentioned before that we may not be in total disagreement about everything. I would like to see the pace of population growth really slow down for one thing.

it already is

to the point that the population will start shrinking before we reach 10 billion

[Yzermandius19]

12 minutes ago, cougar said:

Your read my mind about the tribes - yes the tribes in the Amazones or those in Papua New Guinea, if they still exist are the closest to sustainable styles of life but there come a dozen forum members to ridicule the statement.

We did not need to go that far. 

how far in that direction do we need to go?

because the world getting closer to that than where we are at present

would mean the starvation of billions

therefore that is not a sustainable lifestyle, at all

it's in fact the exact opposite

Edited December 18, 2021 by Yzermandius19

[eyeball]

20 hours ago, Nefarious Banana said:

Small wood logging is alive and well in BC.  The Swedes have nothing to show us.  The few old growth cut blocks are getting all the news coverage and the fake environmentalists light their hair on fire . . . . while the cameras are rolling. BC is doing a good job with it's renewable resource.

'Small wood logging' around here involves trucks hauling loads of toothpicks out of 2nd and even 3rd growth forests. The 3rd growth clear-cuts reveal why the trees coming of them are so anemic, there's virtually no wood debris left to provide nutrients for new generations.

Quote

ps. Merv was the joke around here.  Logging is more than felling a tree to make a picnic table and a set of wind chimes.

Sure it is, it can involve felling a tree to produce incredibly valuable boat lumber and high quality furniture.  I've logged for big companies in the thick of the industry and also as a salvager around the fringes for decades.

Managing a forest is about more than making it available to absentee landlords only interested in churning out as much fibre as possible as fast as they can fell it.  There's certainly more to it than mocking anyone who's serious about having a go at producing a living for themselves outside of a industrial model that's designed by and for the interests of...absentee landlords is really the only way to describe them.

Fishing has gone to hell around here too where small operators have been squeezed out in favour of larger operators by industrial managers that are based 1000's of miles away from the oceans they manage.  It's no wonder they go to hell.

As for our forests, the toothpick farms should be left to the companies and the old growth stands and better quality 2nd growth should be left to a smaller decentralized industry that is largely managed by and for the interests of small towns and regions that have relied on the natural resources that surround them for decades.  There needs to be an adjacency principle applied to forest management and it's utilization whereby the closer to the actual working forests in question the greater the weight of local say in how they're utilized.  The companies can always line up to buy their fibre from local producers and I'm quite sure locals can cut the province it's royalty cheques.   

Edited December 18, 2021 by eyeball

[cougar]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

1. The 3rd growth clear-cuts reveal why the trees coming of them are so anemic, there's virtually no wood debris left to provide nutrients for new generations.

 

2. As for our forests, the toothpick farms should be left to the companies and the old growth stands and better quality 2nd growth should be left to a smaller decentralized industry that is largely managed by and for the interests of small towns

1. There are more reasons too.  After the clear cutting slopes erode and much of the nutrients are washed into the rivers.  Those culverts they install on logging roads get filled up with debris once the road is deactivated.  The water starts running into the ditch on the high side and eventually cuts into the slope and the whole mass of top soil goes down in a slide.  It is made even worse by the increased carbon emissions also pushing the extreme climate events - forest fires, droughts and floods. Those destroyed forests can no longer recover for hundreds if not thousands of years, because the natural cycles need to pump the nutrients from the ocean back up into the mountain - something which is much slower now when salmon runs are at less than 10% of historical levels and so are all other species involved in the ecosystem.  Those logging trucks should be pulling trailers full of nutrients on their way up to replace what is being stripped!  Too late; the morons among us killed us all.

 

2.  Our forest destruction has gone so far, that at this point the only thing that would make sense is to stop harvesting 1st generation trees completely - no new logging roads, no more destruction of the little good habitat left.  In BC we have old growth definitions.  Interestingly they have nothing to do with 1st generation trees but only with the age of the trees.  Then even more interestingly, not all forests have the same age limit to define a forest "old growth".  On the coast, trees less than 250 years old are not even considered old.  In the interior the mark is set at 150 years. 

 

I tried to get some clarification from the BC Government on what is protected, following up on a letter from the forestry stating that "85% of the old growth in BC is protected".    Turns out the "old growth" is some microscopic spots on the BC map, looking pretty much like haze, or mold on the map in a few areas.  Asked the government for more clarification and was directed to imapBC

https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/data/geographic-data-services/web-based-mapping/imapbc

where again I was unable to find what I was looking for.

But I have the answer to my questions before I even ask them

I know that our government likes to throw money on intricate web databases, to throw dust in our eyes, making us think they are doing real management of resources in a first world country with first world methods and technologies, unlike those developing countries that should all learn from us.

While behind our backs they rape the lands and forests without any regard for the species living there or us, the residents.

P.S.   After a few fruitless exchanges of e-mails with [email protected]  this was my final response to them:

_______________________________________________________

Thanks Txxxxxx,

 

Which is the old growth layer I need in IMapBC and how do I get to it; looked everywhere but did not find it?

 

An even more important question, though:

 

What are you guys going to do moving forward to leave the remaining undisturbed habitat alone ?

When are you going to stop issuing resource extraction road building permits?

 

Are you waiting for the sky to fall down on you, before you do that;   because in all likelihood it will.

 

I hope one of you there can engage in a more open and meaningful discussion and turn things around so the public can regain some respect for you.

 

Many thanks,

Edited December 18, 2021 by cougar

[eyeball]

39 minutes ago, cougar said:

While behind our backs they rape the lands and forests without any regard for the species living there or us, the residents.

That adjacency principle I mentioned is pretty much applicable to most areas of our governance.

Quote

 

There are more reasons too.  After the clear cutting slopes erode and much of the nutrients are washed into the rivers.  Those culverts they install on logging roads get filled up withe debris once the road is deactivated.  The water starts running into the ditch on the high side and eventually cuts into the slope and the whole mass of top soil goes down in a slide.

 

Watershed restoration uses a top-down approach. You need stop the crap from running downhill that fouls the landscape and that makes difficult for anything living downstream.  I spent years working for a logging company doing this and it's certainly not rocket science despite the attempts of distant government biologists to pretend it is.      

We need to restore our governance following the same basic principle.

Edited December 18, 2021 by eyeball