Jump to content

Rick Weatherill

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Rick Weatherill

  • Rank
  1. It's called "rape and pillage". Can't get much simpler than that. And all governments are in collusion, at least since the decision was made to de-industrialize this country......
  2. Virtually everyone I have talked to doe not express much enthusiasm for a green recovery. Most think "FUBAR", or such desperation that we'll go back to "normal", if only for a little while to get a handle on things - which leads to same old, same old. Will (for example) the provincial government call an immediate halt to logging? Will Victoria call for an immediate cessation to condo construction, in a genuine effort to call a halt to population growth? Will the feds declare an immediate halt to salt-water commercial fishing, in recognition that fish stocks have become dangerously depleted? The list goes on......
  3. Complicated for sure! But it's all 'bandaid solutions', which means we'll never get a handle on the root causes. Bruce Alexander's "Rat Trap" ( https://thewalrus.ca/2007-12-health/ ) indicates that we'd have to revamp our entire social structure - which isn't going to happen - even though there are enough indicators "out there" (courtesy of the pandemic) that more than heavily suggests what we have to begin doing.
  4. Far cry from Frederick Banting selling his discovery of insulin for $1, with the "absurd" notion that people shouldn't profit at the expense of other people suffering https://www.cdnmedhall.org/inductees/frederickbanting
  5. People have come to believe that the development of a vaccine is inevitable, the silver bullet syndrome, and no one (save a few "outliers" as yourself) is applying any brakes to this runaway notion. Are we living so close to "the edge", psychologically, economically, politically that we have become desperate to the point of incoherence?
  6. It would be comforting to know what robust measures are being taken to prevent the intrusion of Covid 19 from the US, whether it be direct or otherwise.
  7. The Old Growth Forest Report you link to confirms to me the entirely frivolous use we put our "fibre reserves" to. When it becomes necessary for such a detailed report in order to attempt to cross the proverbial "T"s and dot the "I"s in anticipation of having to defend why forests shouldn't be "harvested", the battle is lost. Were I "dictator for a day", I would certainly put the shoe on the other foot, and require the "forest-industrial-complex" to present an in-depth report on why any tree should be harvested. Stephen Hume wrote in Focus last year about logging up island, where ultimately, forests that were supposed to remain standing for 100 years, were ultimately "harvested for fibre" after only 40. This is what I mean by frivolity - the entire industry has no more purpose than to cut trees for the sake of cutting - and the excuses come along after the deed is done. The BCNDP is as culpable, stating as it did during the last election that old growth will be off limits - then, having achieved victory, saying "well some old growth is off limits" under the rubric of jobs and families, if not actually throwing in the word "prosperity". It's been well-demonstrated, in your articles as well as the other contributors to Focus, that BC's forests are more valuable left standing than being mowed down - and I am not even thinking about trees as carbon sinks. Cutting forests for products such as toilet paper, building materials, bio-mass feedstock is just plain silly - if only because any the current uses for "fibre" can easily be obtained from other sources. But we DO live in a world where consumption rules - and it doesn't matter what is consumed. The term "conspicuous consumption" has been around for some time now, but we don't like to describe our consumer habits with this unsavory description. Will we change, in light of the current pandemic? Interesting question, and one I strongly doubt will be effective in our haste to "get back to normal". Bandaids, but nothing fundamental. It is (almost) to wish that the severity of the pandemic rival the bubonic plague that in turn allowed the regrowth of forests in Europe. I like to think though, that we are not that obtuse - in the sense that Andy Dufresne used the word in The Shawshank Redemption. And I retain (I think) enough naivety to hope this government can get it's act together - and that, come the next election (or the one after that) that any change can summarily be "switched off" should another party take the reins of governance.
  8. Our (?) present provincial government seems quite inured to forests as other than "feedstock" and "fibre". It literally cannot/will not see the forest for the trees! Article after article in Focus by Broadland, Hume, Penn and others is completely ignored by the apparatchiks in Victoria (with the question mark above bringing into doubt whether it actually IS "our" government), who (I must surmise) are in thrall to moneyed interests. If there is another explanation (in other than duck speak), I would certainly like to hear it! But until then, we can only watch the ravaging of our forests.
  9. If trees are ":feedstock" or "fibre", then plant hemp or some other fast-growing fibre - and leave the trees alone!
  10. When trees are referred to as "fiber", it is indicative of a major, if not insurmountable, problem in the industry. I would suggest that, if fiber is the main goal of logging, then plant hemp instead of seedlings. After all, they are not "forests" anymore - just monoculture plantations that, like any monoculture crop are weak. The devastation of the mountain pine beetle wasn't only because of warmer winters. It was also the result of a single tree species that allowed for this pandemic.
  • Create New...