Ba, ' é :

AS
ea M

DEVASTATION. These photos, showing what remains after slash
burning of forests, were presented to the Sloan Royal Commission on
_ Forestry by B.C. Communist leader Nigel Morgan some years ago. The
practise was strongly condemned before the forestry hearing. Now,
adding to the devastation of our forests, slash burning is causing
widespread air pollution over the main populated centres — as,

is manceusrcitizans know to their great.consternation. np ape Taree ‘Establishment. and .the

~ Fae mF.

Pesta PS sy 2s te wi

FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 13, 1968

>: Tribun

VOL. 29, NO. 36°

_ SLASH_BURNING:

Highly destructive of the
forest cover, soil and natural
seeding, the smoke pall hanging
over populated areas of this
province in combination with
other more noxious chemical
discharges of industry is today
creating a _ serious health
menace. %

Long a controversial issue of
B.C. forest policy, recent
government figures show that
slash burning was responsible
for almost as much loss of our
forest resources as it saved. »

were burnt over in the
Vancouver Forest District alone
as a result of compulsory slash _

Last year over 20,000 acres.

By NIGEL MORGAN

burning which got out of control.

The cost of this one item of:

$846,024 alone was only slightly
less than the estimated damage
of $929,111 from fires of other
sources. :

Not surprising is the fact that
a strong body of public opinion
(including industry and forestry
experts) now believe that strip-
logging (leaving fire breaks) and
equivalent amounts of money
spent on bulldozing fire blocks
and fire suppression guards
would be infinitely more effec-
tive.

The overall advantages of
slash-burning have never been
proven, and it is contended, the
harmful effects far outweigh —

SS

10¢

Ruins our forests,
pollutes the air

Slash-burning methods of fire hazard abatement have not only become highly
destructive of our forest resources but a menace to our health. They are doing
more harm than good, and urgently need re-examination and drastic revision.

them. In neighboring
Washington State, for example,
the Natural Resources
Department, which regulates
logging on both private and state-
owned lands, does not allow
slash burning as a matter of
course.

A joint committee of industry,
university and government
experts is presently studying the
problem as a result of
recommendations of the
Legislature’s Standing
Committee on Forestry. A
preliminary report is expected
before the end of the year, and
action should be taken by the
spring session to drastically ~
revise the Sie spe slash-

“After all its talk about the
need for a new party with a new
program, TEAM has come up
with very little that is new. When
you combine this with the fact
that it has the support of the
Establishment and is closely
aligned with the NPA, what is
really so different about
TEAM?”

This was the reaction of
Vancouver’s popular fighting
alderman Harry Rankin this
week to the newly-announced
program drafted by TEAM — at
a meeting last weekend.

Rankin said: ‘‘The conclusion
is inéscapable that TEAM is the
party of the big corporations and
real estate interests; it is not a
true reform party. The ordinary
citizen will get no better deal
from this group than from the
NPA.

“The new reform look it’s

putting on is only an effort to win

‘the East End vote, where voters

are justifiably suspicious ‘of the

taxes onh
the. steglect’ es on homes;,

Rankin hits TEAM plan’

they have suffered at its hands ~
all these years.’

In a column of weekly
commentary, published in many
community and labor papers,
Rankin, who supports the new
reform organization, the
Committee of Progressive
Electors (COPE), composed of
ratepayer, tenant and trade
union groups, said:

‘How are we to judge all these
groups?

“T suggest that the yardstick
to use is: who is in them, who
backs them up, and, most
important of all, what is their
program.

“Let’s look at the program
just announced by TEAM. Any
program to be fairly judged
-must be viewed against the basic
issues facing us in the city.
These issues include:

\e\Keeping down. rents and

“ ites

e'Compelling big industrial
aud commercial properties to:

‘pay a fair share of taxes, which

they are certainly not doing now:

\e\A large scale low rental
public housing program;

\@iA ward system to guarantee
representation of all areas in
Council;

\@'An over-all master plan of
city development;

j@'A low fare rapid transit
system as an alternative to
expensive freeways.

“Where does TEAM stand on
these issues?

“Tt says nothing about keeping
down taxes on homes or
increasing them on big
commercial and industrial
properties. That’s because
TEAM’s financial backing
comes from these yeaa

d EE

“See RANKIN, pg. 1.20