> For immediate release: May 13, 1996
> Contact: Mark Westlund, ranmedia@ran.org; Tamar Hurwitz, ranla@ran.org
>
> HOLLYWOOD SUPERSTARS DENOUNCE
> B.C. CLEARCUTS IN NEW YORK TIMES AD
>
> Some of the biggest names in Hollywood have signed on to support Clayoquot
> Rainforest Coalitions campaign to save British Columbias temperate
> rainforests from clearcutting.
As one of the First Nations directly affected by the actions of those who
favor or those who oppose any form of logging in British Columbia, and more
specifically Clayoquot Sound, it astounds us that people can be convinced to
support a cause without first communicating with our First Nations for our
perspectives.
> In a full-page ad in the West Coast edition
> of todays New York TimesMonday, May 13film makers and environmental
> groups urge B.C. lawmakers to take real measures to end forest
> destruction. The ad is timed to correspond with B.C. elections.
This form of action is only indicatative of the shortsightedness on groups
parts to not communicate properly with those directly affected by the
actions such as a full page Ad. Was there any consideration or explanation
given by those groups to the stars about the implications of their actions?
Secondly, the political motivations that guided the timing of this Ad need
further scrutiny. Had any of the stars or the groups who convinced the
stars to support such an Ad considered the "negative" implications that a
change of government would have not only of First Nations but also on the
environment? We think not because if they had given serious thought to
this, they would have communicated with the First Nations to weigh both the
pros and cons of utilizing this form of protest and timing it with an
election. One can't help but speculate that this form of action only
enhances the possibility that the governing party will be removed and an
even more unfriendlier government will take power.
As First Nations, we constantly are struggling with the worst of both evils,
and despite the haphazard manner in which the existing government has
brought about significant changes in Clayoquot Sound, we see that a change
of power would only jeopardize those changes that both the environment
community and First Nations aspire to achieve. Granted, in some circles the
changes are not enough and it may be that whatever changes are put forward,
they will never be enough (except for a complete shut down of all logging
operations). From our First Nations perspectives, we've seen and
experienced a significant change in the attitude of government and we get
concerned that groups would develop a political strategy that could
potentially bring about a change of government that would be even less
friendly to the environment cause. Is that the political motivation to the
purchasing of an Ad?
It may not have been but that strongly looks to be the political implication
of such a strategy adopted by the groups who convinced the stars to sign on.
Is it the political motivation of the groups to see the treaty making
process completed stalled? That is the political fall out of a change of
government and Ads put forward with the timing of an election in mind can do
nothing but further enhance the chances of the political Opposition party to
take power.
> The following actors, producers, and directors have signed on to the ad:
> Ed Asner, Ed Begley Jr., Tom Cruise, Ted Danson, Dana Delany, Laura Dern,
> Richard Donner, Lauren Shuler Donner, Ted Field, Matt Frewer, R.W.
> Goodwin, Daryl Hannah, Woody Harrelson, Lisa Henson, Paul Jackson,
> Kathleen Kennedy, Nicole Kidman, Ali McGraw, Frank Marshall, Penny
> Marshall, Mike Medavoy, Donna Mills, Robert Redford, Rob Reiner, Tim
> Robbins, Alex Rose, Steven Seagal, Martin Sheen, Mary Steenbergen, Oliver
> Stone, Barbra Streisand, Harvey Weinstein, Paula Weinstein, Barbara
> Williams, Lili Fini Zanuck, and Richard D. Zanuck.
What an impressive list!!!!!! A credit must go to Bobby Kennedy Jr. for at
least having the common courteousy to first consult with the First Nations
before taking any real direct actions. That worked to his benefit as we now
view ourselves as having a strong relationship built from the basis of trust,
understanding and committment to work together. It would be great to meet
all of these wonderful stars to share our views and perspectives, but as
First Nations directly affected by the actions of the groups who convinced
the stars to sign onto the Ad, we know that this will never take place given
that they have their Agenda and it appears that our perspectives just don't
meet their Agenda!!!!!!
> B.C.'s natural crown jewel, Clayoquot Sound, has been at the center of an
> international controversy over the past few years. As of last year,
> logging in Clayoquot Sound is supposed to adhere to recommendations by a
> B.C. government-appointed science panel, including reductions in the size
> of clearcuts.
First off, as the groups who convinced the stars to sign onto the Ad fully
know and realize, there is a difference between government adopting a
report and actually implementing a report. Unfortunately in many cases we
all are frustrated with how reports are not being implemented! In the
above, it is stated "As of last year, logging in Clayoquot Sound is supposed
to adhere to recommendations by a B.C. government-appointed science panel,
including the reductions in the size of clearcuts." Last year was the
government's announcement to adopt the Science Panel's report. This was a
fundamental step by government given that all the various groups within the
environment were threatening the government with newly initiated boycotts if
the government did not adopt the report.
The reference to what was to apply as of last year is out of context in that
surely people must realize that there had to be an implementation plan and
strategy in place to give effect to those recommendations made by the
Science Panel and surely it was not the expectation of those groups that the
day government adopted the recommendations was the day that they would also
be expected to be implemented! If that was the groups' expectations, then
unfortunately they were misguided in their thinking as it was made clear in
the governments' announcement that it would take time to implement. They
have now developed an implementation strategy to give effect to the 127
recommendations and as First Nations we knew this process was painstakingly
long - but it was never our understanding that the recommendations would be
law the day they were adopted.
Given this, that's why it astounds us that the groups who convinced the
stars to sign onto the Ad are willing to take a political gamble by timing
the Ad with the elections. Is it not their view that we face a strong
possibility that our government will change and that the Science Panel
requirements will never be declared law if an unfriendlier government takes
power? That is the political implication of fighting the existing
government on the changes they've brought to how business is done,
particularly in Clayoquot Sound. This strategy plays right into the hands
of the Liberals who espouse protecting the interest of big business
corporations like M&B!
[ That's Macmillan-Bloedel, a gigantic logging and paper-products industry
in the province of British Columbia. --Gary ]
As First Nations directly affected, our strategy is not to take this
government out of power but it is geared towards working with government to
give effect to those changes that they have brought to Clayoquot Sound. Our
position all along has been that we do not oppose logging in general, but we
certainly want a direct say in changing how the big logging companies
conduct business in our territories and that includes changing the forest
practises. Our view is that by purchasing Ads that could influence the
provincial elections that could potentially put into power a more
unfriendly party will only hurt the cause of not just the environment
community but even moreso the aspirations of those First Nations. It is
that perspective that we ask the stars to consider. It is unfortunate
that those groups that convinced the stars to sign on have not yet come to
grips with our views points given the fact that this has been relayed to
them time and time again in our numerous meetings. It is obvious that our
interests and our perspectives don't blend with their Agenda, thus one can't
help but feel that those groups will forsake the interests of others just to
achieve their Agenda and unfortunately, with a strong possibility of a
change of government this could be a detriment to all groups not just First
Nations.
> However, the most important parts of Clayoquot Sound, its pristine
> rainforest valleys are still slated for logging and clearcutting
> continues, inflicting extensive damage on the delicate rainforest
> ecosystem. The partial protection applies only to Clayoquot Sound, which
> comprises .1 per cent of B.C.s total forests. The rest of B.C.s forests
> enjoy no authentic protection at all.
Granted logging still continues in Clayoquot Sound but it becomes debatable
over whether or not such logging is at the magnitude that it was
pre-Clayoquot Sound Land Use decision (aka 1993). Clearcutting continues?
Again, it is a given that some form of clearcut continues but what has yet
to be agreed to within all circles is the "what constitutes a clearcut"?
This is not clearly understood within the environment communities nor is it
clearly defined within First Nations commnities as well. Yet, our position
remains that we do not want a continued repeat of the vast tracts of land
that were stipped clear of all timber. Has that changed? In our view, we
are seeing much smaller proposed cutblocks that are nowhere close to what
devastation and destruction that the big corporations have come to be known
for.
Does that indicate that First Nations are happy with the extend of logging
or the type of logging happening in Clayoquot Sound yet? Absolutely not -
we will continue to push hard for more changes and it is through an uneasy
cooperation with government that we see ourselves having any impact.
Secondly, given that we are now involved in the treaty negotiations over the
management and ownership of those same resources, it is in our interests to
work with the various government agencies to protect our interests until a
treaty is negotiated. With this latter point, did the information not get
to the stars that given that the Ad was politically motivated to coincide
with the provincial elections that with a change of government our process
of negotiating treaties would come to a complete standstill? With this at a
standstill, then the steps we've taken to give effect to changes in logging
practises and protecting areas would also be stopped with an unfriendlier
government!
> The Hollywood celebrities outline concrete measures which British Columbia
> lawmakers could undertake to address the destruction of these great
> forests which are among the last remaining natural forests anywhere in the
> world. These include protection for Clayoquot Sound's pristine areas,
> drastically reducing the rate of logging in B.C. and dramatically
> increasing the percentage of rainforest protected.
Question # 1: Protection of Clayoquot Sound's pristine areas would fall
under what form of protection and what impact would this have on First
Nations in treaty negotiations? Are all the calls for protection done on
the basis that they are "without prejudice" to the First Nations treaty
negotiations?
It is our view that if the expectation is that the areas being called for
being protected supercede treaty negotiations then those groups who
condemned the government in 1993 for ignoring First Nations are no different
because they would have the same cause and effect! Why the double
standard? Again, given that those stars were convinced by those groups to
support the Ad without first communicating with those First Nations directly
impacted by those actions only reflects that those groups are out to meet
their own Agenda at the expense of First Nations interests! We stood up and
condemned the Provincial Government when they announced their land use plan
in 1993 and we will stand up now to condemn others who try to achieve the
same thing by ignoring the views of First Nations.
> The Clayoquot Rainforest Coalition, which includes Rainforest Action
> Network, Greenpeace, Natural Resources Defense Council, Coalition for
> Forests, Pacific Environment and Resource Center, and Friends of Clayoquot
> Sound, has been working to protect the ancient rainforests of Clayoquot
> Sound on Vancouver Island, and throughout British Columbia.
It really is becoming disheartening to continuously see that those that
support these types of strategies are also those that supposedly support
First Nations interests! Yet, we continuously see contradicting statements
and actions that cause First Nations to be very suspicious of the
aspirations of those that claim to support our cause.
The Rainforest Action Network (including the Friends of Clayoquot Sound)
condemned the Science Panel Report by signing onto the Juh-Juh-Dids
Declaration. Yet, they are part of the groups who condemn the government
for not taking action to enforce those same requirements put forward by the
Science Panel! Those same groups condemned the B.C. Treaty making process
that would benefit First Nations in taking control over those lands and that
would bring about a definite change in how business is done in all of
British Columbia not just Clayoquot Sound! Granted, we have since received
a letter from the FOCS Board withdrawing their support to the Juh-Juh-Dids
Council declaration, so it becomes confusing as to who is speaking for who!
Finally, it is not our intention to go to war with the environment community
over this issue because philisophically we have more in common than we all
realize. Where we begin to separate is our strategies chosen to give effect
to our philosophies! We don't apologize one bit for the strategies we've
chosen nor do we call upon the environment community to apologize for their
choices. But, for the average reader we owe it to them to put forward our
perspectives on what we've seen transpire over the course of the last three
years and we must make it clear to the stars and the groups that your
actions don't just affect the government or companies your target but they
hurt First Nations moreso. With a real possibility of a change of
government we get concerned that the effect that the Ad could have is to
bring in a government that is more sensitive to the desires and interests of
the big business corporations. If this happens then we are all the losers
in British Columbia - not the stars!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Comments from NativeNet listowner, Gary Trujillo (gst@gnosys.svle.ma.us):
A similar exchange took place on the NATIVE-L mailing list this past
January concerning Clayoquot Sound environmental protection and the
matter of whether or not First Nations people were being consulted or
are party to the process through which efforts to protect forest areas
of British Columbia are devised by environmental organizations. These
earlier articles provide useful background to the present debate. To
access these articles, please point your Web browser at:
http://bioc09.uthscsa.edu/natnet/archive/nl/9601/0062.html
This URL refers to the first article. Select the "next in thread" link
to see the second, or use the URL:
http://bioc09.uthscsa.edu/natnet/archive/nl/9601/0084.html