The “UMA nicajaim it iain nian imuamanaiauate WHEN the Provincial Forestry Act was amended in 1948 to bring in the management li- cence scheme the way was Opened by the Johnston-Ans- Comb government for Canadian _ 8nd American monopolies to take over the largest part of British Columbia’s forest lands, which account for fifty percent of the province’s entire natural vesources, The forestry management li- cence scheme is a gigantic hoax. Under the pretext of preserv- Ing our forests, the government IS permitting the biggest steal ‘in jour entire* "history. ‘And Most of it is going to U.S. in- terests. The deal is so rank that even ‘George Cruikshank, raser Valley Liberal MP, was ‘Compelled to tell the recent Lib- €ral provincial executive meet- Mg, at which the scheme was discussed, that “if you continue to play ‘for the big interests , You will ruin ‘the Liberal party.” Recently a U.S. Congressman Taised a storm when he pro- Posed that the U.S. should an- nex Canada. There was more to this statement that meets he eye. What ‘has actually been going on is that many of nada’s industries and natural resources are being taken over by U.S. monopolies. The sub- Servience of the Ottawa and _ ictoria governments to Wash- _ Ington’s war dictates and ‘their _ Surrender of our national inde- Pendence, is finding direct ex- Pression in schemes like the orestry management licences, Which hand over major control ft British Columbia’s most im- ut industry to U.S. capi- al, ) So far the government has Sranted twelve licences. The first eight of these (figures for te last four are not imme- ; diately available) gave away 2,029,840 acres of erown land. Several applications for licences ave still to come ‘before the , Cakiire: These include one for three million acres to the Columbia Cellulose Corpora- ‘On; two applications in the Al- Stni area, one from Bloedel . 8Nd the other from H. R. Mac- Milian; which. between. them ©over a vast’ area from the Nit- Nat River near Cowichan Lake ~ far north of the Alberni Canal, frobere is also an application i °m Clayburn for 5,400 acres ay the Fraser Valley. This com- Sy is an affiliate of Gilley "OS., which in turn is owned big e How does the forestry man- agement scheme work? Here are the major terms of the licence: : ® All the crown lands granted are reserved for the sole use of the company. These lands are withdrawn from sale, settle- ment or occupancy. The crown cannot sell or lease any of it, nor is anyone to be permitted to settle on any part of it. @® Special tax privileges are given to the company. Crown lands handed over under the licence are exempted from the Taxation Act. All improve- ments made by the company with regard to capital spent on OO ee ee te ee Te ee Te Ene 0 Per Ty MAURICE RUSH shows how Coalifion . forest management licenses are giving our resources away fo the monopolies timber steal SOUT CM UCT ALALIALLOniRtiguiMtiaienatiNnananenenen by Evans, Coleman and Evans, ithe company of which Byron Johnson was managing director until he succeeded’ John Hart as premier of B.C. The first management _li- cence gave 668,440 acres near Terrace, B.C., to Columbia Cel- lulose, Canadian subsidiary of the powerful U.S. monopoly, ‘Celanese Corporation of Amer- ica. This corporation is now applying for another licence for three million acres near Castle- gar. If granted, and there is every reason to believe 'that the Johnston government will ac- cept the company’s application, this monopoly will have taken out of the public domain an empire of 3,668,440 acres, an area;roughly as large as all of Vancouver Island south of Nan- aimo! ° operation, cutting of timber, etc., are exempt from taxes. And if the government wishes, it may exempt these companies from paying the Forest Protec-' tion Tax, which is a tax levied to provide a government fund to. protect forests from fire and other dangers. ® All land grants are “contin- ‘uous”—to use the official term —meaning that tthe lands are given in perpetuity, \vithout any time limit. ®@ Once granted, these lands pass out of the public domain and become the personal prop- erty of those who hold the for- estry lice Thus, one indi- vidual who may hold control of one or two million acres of what were formerly crown lands can ‘bequeath them to whomever { he pleases. In short, they be- ccme part of his personal prop- erty. ® In accepting a licence a com- pany agrees to a certain maxi- mum cut each year, but this quota can be revised with no limnit in the event of depression, war or other emergency. @ If any of the areas given away are needed for public parks, experimental stations or ‘any other public use, the gov- ernment can withdraw. up to one percent of the land, but only with the consent of the company. ® A most pernicious feature of the licences is a provision (sec- tion 43) that no person who is of the Chinese or Japanese race, and who is not a British sub- ject,. will be employed “in or upon the cutting or removal of any timber under the terms of this licence.” Here is goy- ernment -imposed racial dis- crimination. As can be seen, the granting of a forestry management li- cence to a monopoly gives that monopoly unlimited control over vast stretches of our forest lands. The public’s right to the lands — public lands — is - ended. ° And in return, what are these monopolies obliged to pay for this huge concession? First, they must pay one cent per acre per year rentvon all crown lands granted in ‘the licence. In the case of Columbia Cellu- lose, if it gets the three mil- lion acres it is now asking for, it will have to pay the govern- ment $36,684 a year for owner- ship and exploitation of forestry lands covering 2,668,440 acres. What a gift! The other condition the com- panies must undertake to live up to is that they will reforest 1,000 acres per year or ten percent of the total acres, which- ever is the lesser. Again tak- ing Columbia Cellulose as an example, this company would only have to reforest 1,000 acreg a year as the price for exploit- ing its huge empire, but even here, the new trees growing in the reforested area are fhe property of the company to be logged when mature, with all profits accruing to the com- pany. It’s a sure thing for the monopolies, whichever way you look at it. > The big timber companies : have always had preferred treatment from the provincial government. Revenue collected by the province has been scan- ¢ PACIFIC TRIBUNE — ' ial EOS SE FE IEE dalously low. In 1950, for example, the gross earnings of the logging indus- try were $430 millions. Yet during that year the provincial coffers only got $5 million from the entire industry—or a little better than one percent. Another serious side -of the licence scheme is that it will hand over control of the entire wood and pulp industry to a very small number of power- ful monopolies, which through control of the industry, will have B.C. by the throat eco- nomically and politically. This process is in fact already well advanced. At the recent Liberal execu- tive meeting, one of the dele- gates warned that ‘in five years there will only be, four timber companies left in B.C.” It is significant that even in those circles this trend is recognized. The three biggest companies in the running now are Colum- bia Cellulose, MacMillan-Bloe- del and Abitibi. Under the management scheme the small logging op- erators are being pushed out of most of the forest area. At a recent public gathering one of them complained that soon there will be nothing left for them ‘but “the ‘tops of* mountain peaks.” These small enterprises can- not survive. in an _ industry which is being highly monopo- lized through government ac- ion. In answer to tthe small logging companies the govern- ment claims that it has set aside 11 “public working circles”. with a total of 1,518,000 acres of crown land. The timber on this land is to be sold to the highest, bidder. The catch here, however, is that the big operators can bid for these timber lands, too. With more capital behind them, and more efficient machinery, it is more than likely they will easily outbid the small oper- ators, who will get only the crumbs the monopolies are pre- pared to leave them. e ; The labor movement has a vital interest in opposing the forest management licence scheme. Trade unions and other people’s’ organizations cannot stand idly by while our birthright is handed over by a reactionary government to the monopolies, most of which are controlled from ‘Wall ‘Street. The Johnson-Anscomb govern- ment stands condemned for en- gineering’ this shameful be- trayal of the public’s trust. The labor movement of B.C. should demand: (1) That pub- lic control over crown lands be retained and that the forest management licence legislation (Section 32A of the Forestry Act) be repealed. All licences already granted should be with- drawn as auickly as nossible, (2) That in its place a govern: ment-managed plan should be worked out to protect forests from over-exploitation and to ensure adequate reforestation. Such a plan must include ade- quate , taxes against logging companies in order to secure enough returns to maintain our forests. These taxes must also drastically increase the contri- Cd , bution of ‘the logging companies to provincial revenues to help ytty ‘lfor social services and other costs pf funntng this province. Such @ government- managed forestry plan must im- pose stringent regulations on 'the logging companies in order to eliminate wasteful methods of logging and ensure protec- tion of British Columbia’s for- estry resources. ‘© Maurice Rush, author of this article, is provincial labor secretary of the Labor-Pro- gressive party. FEBRUARY 1, 1952 — PAGE 9 .