> Coming from Clayoquot; On the edge of the ancient giants of the forest and
> the crashing Pacific ocean. .. amongst the wolves, cougar, bear and
> eagles,towering cedars, spruce and hemlock; amongst the ancient mysteries
> of native lore, and the killer whales, the migrating grey whales and
> humankind's connections to the spiritual teachings of all of these and
> more...as the old salamanders in the bush talk to us and help us to remember
> these connections.
>
> Clearcutting is still taking place there...
As First Nations who reside right in Clayoquot Sound we know all to
well that there is still on-going activity in the logging industry
right here in our backyard. Is the scale and level of that activity
to the degree you reflect in your general statement? That certainly
is debatable because the Annual Allowable Cut and size of blocks have
been reduced quite dramatically since 2-3 years ago.
Is it fair then to just generalize your statement to leave the
impression that nothing has changed? As active players in what is
happening to change how the companies carry out their business we
feel we've made a significant difference to the volume and size of
the activities happening today.
As First Nations, we have consistently stated our position that we
are not opposed to logging as an industry but we are opposed to the
manner in which companies choose to carry out their business.
Granted, companies choose to utilize what they deem to be the most
economical method of clearcutting but the high public profile that
the Clayoquot Sound Region gained has put those companies under such
a microscope that it has forced many significant changes.
Maybe, because as First Nations we are not accustomed to being taken
seriously and our philosophies are being taken more serious now - it
is easier to see the changes happening. Whereas, in other societies
who've always had their views at least considered and in some ways
factored into the planning - people's judgement become clouded
because they cannot see much change. It is easier to see change
coming from have absolutely no input to having a direct say in how
business is carried out. In that regard, we see significant changes
and we will continue to work to make more changes that significantly
alter how business is done in the Sound.
> Can you define variable retention? The Scientific Panel Report gives
> it much leeway, how much needs to be retained and whose definition is
> valid?
A comment like this is precisely why the non-native society at large
seems most displeased with the perceived lack of progress. We get so
hung up on definitions and whose definition is the correct one. In
our communities as First Nations, we've spend more time and energy on
implementing and putting into effect the Science Panel Report instead
of taking up alot of our time debating over whether or not variable
retention is properly defined and whether or not my definition is the
right one or not.
We've accepted that the Science Panel Report has been accepted by the
Provincial Government and our job now is to ensure that the many
reccommendations are put into practise. How? Quite simple, we've
spent our time pushing for changes in the management plans for any
cutblock area to reflect the findings of the Science Panel and we've
had measured success in that regard. Naturally, others will debate
whether or not those successes we see are enough, but that's the
unfortunate situation we see developing in the non-native society.
They become so fixed on it being their way and it must happen
yesterday instead of today that really no progress is made.
At least with working and changes steps at a time we are making a
difference. Why take it a step at a time? As First Nations, we've
made it quite clear that we know all too well what it is like to be
displaced in your own backyard and be forced to live with high
unemployment rates while the economy flourishes around us. We know
it all to well what it is like to be without those economic benefits
that the non-native society otherwise takes for granted. Therefore,
we don't feel that just because actions taken by the non-native
society over the years to displace our First Nations does not make it
right for us to displace non-natives. Two wrongs don't make a right!
Thus, if there is any so called happy medium, it is for us to feel
that we are directly involved in the decision making process on how
the companies carry out their work without jeopardizing and
displacing many people out of their livelihood then we are quite
satisfied that this is the route for us to take. We will continue in
that process as long as we feel we are being treated with the same
regard and respect for both the land and the economy of our various
communities.
> All is not well. Do not go to sleep, don't be pacified, stay awake,
> stay aware.
Absolutely, we agree wholeheartedly that people must not go to sleep
on this issue! What comes into question is the manner in which
people choose to keep this issue alive! Do we continue with the
on-going public campaigns and rhetoric until one or the other caves
in to what the other desires as the ideal?
As First Nations, we don't feel that we must have it entirely our way
but we also feel that neither those in the industry or those in the
conservations/preservation movement can have it entirely their way
either! There has to be some reflection of compromise put forward
that allows real changes from being acknowledged and recognized.
We haven't slept on this issue at all! For the past 3 years we've
worked hard to make a difference in how companies think and we see
with measures taken that our views are being taken serious and it is
being reflected by changes happening on the ground. Granted it is
not to the degree we want but it is a positive step and we can only
continue with our efforts to bring those positives to the level we
really aspire to achieve.
> The native leaders are in meetings constantly and pressured with the
> tactics of big corporate business and the ever-present big payoff.
As a leader in my First Nation, I strongly resent this statement!
For one, we've never had the opportunity to even converse so how
would you know what we've been doing in those meetings? On what
basis do you place such a generalization about our involvement with
the companies? On what authority and supporting data do you base
this view that we've been bought off by the companies? I am very
interested in hearing and seeing your basis for placing such a strong
statement in this! As I am sure the other four First Nations leaders
are so anxious to see how you've become the judge of our activities
and concluded as you have that we've been paid off!
> Nuxalk chiefs and leaders from Bella Coola on the mainland coast are
> fighting to stop Interfor's ongoing destruction of their hereditary
> territory on King Island.
We are very pleased that you are supportive of the Nuxalk chiefs and
the efforts they are taking to stop the on-going destruction of their
traditional territories. We applaud the Nuxalk for taking their own
actions in their territories and we can only wish them encouragement
with changing what's going on in their lands.
Having said that, we also need to make it very clear that it is not
our place as the Central Region First Nations to place judgement on
the efforts they are taking in their own territory. We can only show
proper respect for the stand they are taking in their lands.
Equally, we would expect no less from the Nuxalk, that they would
respect the steps and efforts that the five First Nations have taken
here in Clayoquot Sound to change what's happening. Protocol
dictates that it's our decision to make and we must be happy with the
steps we are taking and whether or not we are feeling that we are
making a difference.
As stated earlier, our strategy taken may differ from others but we
are satisfied that we are making a difference and changes are
happening whether people will acknowledge it or not is not our place
to worry about because we know first hand from our involvement that
there is measured change. Is that change at the level we want it?
Definitely not! We seek must more dramatic changes and we are going
to make sure those changes happen!
> As these people have never signed any treaty with the government of
> British Columbia, their aboriginal rights have not been extinguished.
The Nuxalk are not the only ones who have never signed a treaty nor
are they the only ones whose right were not extinguished. Here in
Clayoquot Sound, we are in the same position. What sets us apart is
that we were successful in negotiating an Interim Measures Agreement
with British Columbia that protects our interests in all activities
that are happening in Clayoquot Sound through the creation of a
Central Region Board that has 50% representation from First Nations
and they are a decision-making body.
Naturally, with such numbers on a body like this, we will not
jeopardize our own positions regarding treaty negotiations by holding
to the status quo, whether it be logging or not. You can be sure
that the Board members are protecting our interests and push very
hard to change the various applications and plans that reflect the
status quo (i.e. clearcut logging applications).