To grant or not to grant a community forest licence, that is the question. I say grant it and give us a chance to decide what goes on in our forests, reap some of the financial rewards and save our watersheds.
I've had many conversations with politicians and conservationists surrounding Sechelt's proposed community forest during the last couple of months. I feel this has become a personal issue for some, and many have lost sight of what a community forest could mean for the Coast.
It could mean a revitalized economy providing jobs for locals for years to come. It could mean the end of clear-cutting in a portion of the Coast's dwindling forests. It could mean profit to be used for Coast-wide improvements in recreation, and it could mean designating local watersheds off-limits to those who would cut without regard for the safety of our drinking water.
I suppose it could also mean bloated pocketbooks for a select few and stronger public outcry than ever before. But I still have faith in our elected officials. The last time I checked, they also had to drink our water and live in our communities.
And if my faith in the politicians is weakened at some point, my faith in the people of this community won't wane.
I know there are those of us who will make sure the District includes our values, our needs and our desires in a community forest management plan. But we need to give the District the chance to secure the licence before that management plan can take shape.
I want the district to be awarded a community forest licence and then I want to see the management plan reflect the needs and desires of the public.
It boils down to an issue of trust, and I'm willing to trust that the District has the community's best interests at heart.I'm also willing to trust the mayor's statement that there will be extensive community consultation while developing a management plan for the community forest.
I was at the first public consultation meetings for the community forest and there was never an opposition raised to the idea of a community forest on the Coast.
People were intrigued, excited and in favour of local control over our resources.
But once the watersheds were identified in the community forest area, all hell broke loose. Some have made it a mission ever since to quash Sechelt's chances of securing a community forest licence.
The issue of logging in our watersheds won't go away if the community forest doesn't come to fruition. Eventually another logging company will apply for the logging permit. That company could be from off-Coast and not care much about the damage they leave behind.
If the watersheds are in our own jurisdiction, I see more hope for their safety. Our community will help guide the forest practices within our community forest and it's easier to bend the ear of a local politician you see at your daily coffee stop than a minister sitting in a leather chair telling his secretary he's not available to talk.
I hope the licence is granted and that representatives from all government bodies and interest groups on the Coast get on board and help create a management plan we can all be proud of.
