Clayoquot to be logged?! By: West Coast Greeny (40 replies) August 2, 2006 - 8:47pmRe: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 20 2006 - 7:36pm) Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 20 2006 - 7:13pm) Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 20 2006 - 6:55pm) Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 20 2006 - 6:48pm) Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 20 2006 - 6:21pm) Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 20 2006 - 6:12pm) Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 20 2006 - 5:58pm) Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 20 2006 - 5:39pm) Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 13 2006 - 11:00pm) Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 13 2006 - 6:02pm) Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 13 2006 - 1:17am) Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 13 2006 - 12:38am) Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 7 2006 - 11:17pm) Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 7 2006 - 11:04pm) Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 7 2006 - 10:34am) Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 7 2006 - 10:22am) Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 6 2006 - 9:16pm) Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 6 2006 - 5:47pm) Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 4 2006 - 9:44pm) Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 4 2006 - 8:11pm) Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 4 2006 - 8:07pm) Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 4 2006 - 7:58pm) Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 4 2006 - 6:44pm) Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 4 2006 - 5:27pm) Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 4 2006 - 5:07pm) Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 4 2006 - 4:20pm) Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 4 2006 - 4:07pm) Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 4 2006 - 4:00pm) Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 4 2006 - 12:18pm) Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 3 2006 - 7:13pm) Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 3 2006 - 6:43pm) Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 3 2006 - 2:38pm) Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 3 2006 - 1:54pm) Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 2 2006 - 9:19pm) Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 2 2006 - 8:47pm)
- Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Feb 27 2007 - 5:40pm)
- Quote: They took years to By: M. Spector (Jun 10 2010 - 10:40pm)
- Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 27 2006 - 11:36pm)
- Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 27 2006 - 9:03pm)
- Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 21 2006 - 9:12am)
quote:... but it's not clear from that article whether these companies will be as bad as feared.
I am quite familiar with the modus operandi of the culprits involved.They are there for profit and if sustainability and forest stewardship is a goal,the goal will only be as a smokescreen for the real goal,cut everything they can get their hands on.
quote:
I think the important thing to remember here is that the Liberal government pressured them to increase their annual cuts or face losing their licence. Taking advantage of the band's tax free status maybe part of what that these companies are looking at(?)
Ah yes,the use it or lose it provisions play into industry's hands.The impetus for this provision is to enhance government's revenue flow and has nothing to do with forest stewardship.
Basically, nothing will happen with ANY cutting application unless FN are actively onside.Great idea but it leaves the bands open to being exploited by sophisticated corporations and also the miriad "consultants" who pocket everything that isn't bolted down.