🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <25hd06$649@vanbc.wimsey.com>,
    sl@vanbc.wimsey.com (Stuart Lynne) writes:

>
> Well the majority of the people in BC are NOT in favour of the current
> government policy WRT to Clayoquot so perhaps it's more like the left hand
> trying to get the attention of the right hand.
>

   Please quote your source for the above statement. Are there really
more than 1.5 million people who have stood up and said they are not in
favour? Has a scientifically validate poll suggested this many would if asked?
(I've seen hard evidence of only a few thousand who have indicated they
actually give a damn either way )

   I'm pretty certain that the MAJORITY of the people in BC don't really
care much about Clayoquot, and that of those who do very few know
enough about the situation to make an informed decision. I'm in that second
group. I've followed both sides of the argument and found virtually nothing
that the two sides agree on. Both sides are carefully filtering the story to
achieve a political agenda and we're not hearing the facts of the situation
(including both the potential damage to the Clayoquot area and the
provincial/global ecological significance of the area).

>
> Exactly, it's the government that made this *BAD* decision. Not the people.
> In fact one of the reasons that the NDP got in was through the efforts of
> people now violently opposed to what is happening in Clayoquot (can you say
> sold out, I knew you could).
>

   Again, some evidence would be nice. The current government has made a
number of enviromental protection decisions ( Carmanah, Parksville Flats,
Tahtsheeni (sp?) ). Because they make one that goes against the environmental
lobby they are accused of selling out? ( I'm not saying the Clayoquot was
necessarily a good decision - as I indicated above I haven't been given
enough reliable information to make a decision on this issue - but it's
hardly fair to call one decision, which may or may not have been an error,
a "sell-out" ). Knowing what you know now, which of the parties which had any
chance of forming the government (Socred, NDP or Liberal) do you think would
have made the best decision here? Can you quote any of their track record to
support this?

   And exactly whose point of view should the government be taking in this
issue in order not to "sell out". On this newsgroup we've had a number of
people who want to see selective logging (vs clearcut) in Clayoquot, and
others who want the area in it's entirety to never be touched. Is there
any decision which would have satisfied all the protestors - if so what is it?

   Is the Clayoquot the end of the agenda here? I've heard the protestors
claim it's the "last significant coastal rainforest in BC". Does that mean
that if a decision was made to protect this area in it's entirety then all
other forests which aren't currently protected are fair game? If so let's
hear the protestors say so, if not let's hear exactly how much more area
should be protected.

>
> Well, you have to get the attention of the government somehow. Merely voting
> them in doesn't seem to count anymore.
>

  Perhaps showing them some evidence that a majority of the people
in BC actually care would be a start. Even a few hundred thousand names
on a petitition would probably be a good start.

>
> He already did cave in to the special interest groups. It would be nice if
> he simply went back to what he/they said they where going to do WRT to the
> environment etc.
>

  And the environmentalists are not a "special interest group"?

--
=============================================================================
Malcolm Dunnett    Malaspina College                Email: dunnett@mala.bc.ca
Computer Services  Nanaimo, B.C. CANADA V9R 5S5       Tel: (604)755-8738