B.C.’s wildlife policy skirts issue of habitat loss due to logging
Mark Hume in Sunday's Globe: “Decisions on the coast would need to include engagement due to the controversial nature of logging old growth,” states the government document in a classic case of bureaucratic understatement. The logging of old growth is widely opposed in B.C. – the public surely won’t welcome a plan where taxpayers are supposed to pay for it. The plan outlines how the forest industry will be subsidized to go after pockets of old trees “that are uneconomic to harvest” because they are sparsely scattered or are at high elevation. Some of the costs would be recovered through timber sales, but it is a money-losing proposition. In year four, for example, the province will spend $25-million to get timber worth $6-million. Why do something like that? The government justifies this by saying it will keep loggers working and improve the supply of timber, which has been reduced by overcutting, a pine-beetle kill and forest fires. “They are running out of timber because of overharvesting throughout the province,” environmental activist Vicky Husband said. “This is a desperate move that’s all about keeping up the short-term timber supply, with no consideration for wildlife values. They are going after every last little bit of forest out there, with no consideration for the impact on biodiversity.”