This week:

Who’s minding
the dirt? Nobody.

When we looked at the term
"tenure" last week we discovered
some rather surprising things. First,
tenure is supposed to offer forest
companies and their staff. some
security; but it can be taken away
by the government. Second, forest
companies are responsible for
timber management; but only
minimal silviculture work is
required. And third, nobody is
fully responsible for managing the
land.

None of these faults in the tenure
system are desirable, of course.
But this third item has the poten-
tial of destroying the entire forest
industry... and a whole lot more.
‘The land, which is primarily dirt,
the place where trees and other
plants grow, is our most valuable
resource. And we don’t have any
idea whai we’re doing to it.

We have a Ministry of Forests, a
Ministry of Environment, a Minis-
try of Agriculture, and yes, even a
Ministry of Crown Lands. But the
Ministry of Forests is only inter-
ested in contracting out the respon-
sibility of taking care of our trees.

The mandate of the Ministry of
Environment is only air and water
quality. The Ministry of Agricul-
ture is only interested in things
like orchards and corn fields. And
the Ministry of Crown Lands is
where you go to lease or buy a
piece of public land. None of these
ministries has anything to do with
the management of our land.
Perhaps, you might say, if the
government isn’t interested in
taking care of our land, then land
management isn’t really all that
important. Try telling that to a
farmer. He won't be easily con-
vinced, Everyone knows farmers
manage their land with great care.
They rotate crops, plough, fertilize,
irrigate and nurture their soil as
though it were gold. Why?
Because it’s the only resource
they’ve got. The soil is what pro-
duces the crops they sell. Treat it
like "dirt" and they’ll soon be out
of business... and they know it,
So if the farmer is so smart,
what’s wrong with the govem-
ment? Why do they seem to
believe we can talk about things

by Tod Strachan, in consultation with Rod Amold and Doug Davies

like “forests forever" when we
could well be altering the supply
of nutrients and acidity of the soil
with every new crop? A few crop

. rotations. down the road and the

largest trees we can grow might be
less than a foot in diameter.

In reality, though, there’s prob-
ably nothing wrong with govern-
ment policy as it stands. It’s sim-
ply that it doesn’t go far enough.
The system that has evolved over
time isn’t based on a land manage-
ment strategy. Current policy has
been reactive rather than proactive

. in design and contains no basic

philosophy for managing the land.
This is an important little detail:
our current system manages our

forests... not our land. The impor-.

Contributed by
Mary Ann Burdett

Riverboat Days in Terrace —
a modern tribute to the
pioneers who first ventured in-
to the awesome beauty and
rugged wildness of the Skeena
River Valley.

As the riverboats were once
an integral part of the lifestyle
of this area, now ‘Riverboat
Days’’ falling on the first
weekend in August each year
has become a much-looked-
forward-to event in the lives of
the residents. This festival is
coordinated by the Riverboat
Days Committee and all events
are run by service organizations
or sports and youth clubs.
Local businesses get into the
spirit of things by window
dressing, wearing of costumes
and sponsoring of contests
" among the business populace.
Cultural organizations con-
tribute widely with arts and

‘crafts show, musical tributes,
etc. The native bands in the
area are strong supporters of
the weekend and thrill par-
ticipants and observers alike
with native art and culture
shows, displays of native danc-
ing, tempting dishes of tradi-
tional foods and magnificent
floats in the parade.

The Saturday morning
parade has, from the begin-
ning, been one of the main
events of interest, and under
the sponsorship of the Royal
Canadian Legion, continues to
grow in size and quality each
year. The City of Terrace spon-
sors an exceptional display of
fireworks on the Friday night,
as well as holding an open
house in conjunction with an
antique car show to kick off
events.

There is a slo-pitch tourna-
ment, a soccer tournament and
a horseshoe tournament which

John Pifer ==" Continued from page As

and head for the beaches or the
psychiatric couch, as required.

1. A mini-Cabinet-shuffle to
come within six weeks, to make
Jacobsen minister of social ser-
vices, to bring Graham Bruce
into the tent, and to deal with
the attorney-general vacancy.

2. A fall election to be held

in mid or early October, there-
fore to be announced in mid or
early September.

This scribe says the odds on
the first are 6-to-5, almost a
sure thing; but the second is
maybe 10-to-1... at least.

Place your bets.

run the entire weekend, and, of

‘course, a paddlewheel tavern.

There is a riverboat run, spon-
sored by the Seniors Sports
Committee, a Slingers’ race on
Sunday and several pancake
breakfasts.

The children are by no
means overlooked, having col-
ouring contests, games, races,
prizes galore and a ‘‘Family
Day in the Park’’.

Adults and children alike are
royally entertained by the
Gizeh Temple Shrine Clowns,
Skeena Unit. Even the animals
are a part of things, with the
Totem Saddle Club being very
notable in the parade and also
holding the Timberland Horse
Show on Saturday and Sunday.
Miniature “‘riverboat races”’
are held out at Copper flats
with refreshments available to
contestants and cheerers.

Riverboat Days is a weekend
when the warmth, friendliness,
cooperation and unflagging
spirit of the pioneers is even
more obvious than usual in the
modern-day people of this
community, It is a great attrac-
tion to surrounding towns and
areas and attracts tourists on a
returning basis from all parts
of Canada, the United States
and some European countries.
We will all be there again this
year — you’d be most welcome
to join us.

tance of the land was either forgot-
ten over time or it was considered
to be something of little value, not
worthy of a policy at all.

When they were putting our
various management systems
together, therefore, various aspects
of those systems were dealt out to
a number of ministries, and no
effective means of coordinating
them was ever devised. This left
our number-one resource, our land,
out in the cold and that left every-
one in the province with a big
problem. Without a land use man-
agement strategy in place we have
been blindly mining out our equity
in the soil without even realizing
it. We were told that trees were
our number-one resource and we
believed it. The truth is, though,
trees are only a product of the

~ land. Our number one resource is

the dirt in which they grow.

How can this great oversight by
the: government:. and .the forest
companies be corrected? With
great difficulty. It’s possible that
the dozen or so forest committees,
commissions and task forces cur-
remly reviewing the situation in
our forests might come up with
some ideas for dramatic change.
But it’s much more likely, if these
groups follow in the footsteps of
the committees, commissions and
task forces of the past, we won’t
get a new system that deals with
land management at all; only a few
more band-aids designed to patch
up the system we have... the sys-
tem that doesn't deal with land
management.

But let’s be positive and consider
the first scenario. What sort of
dramatic change might one of
these groups suggest? Consider the
possibilities of this example. Our
entire bureaucratic system is
scrapped and replaced with some-
thing that makes sense. Al the top
of the heap is a "super ministry"
—— the Ministry of Lands. Working
under this super minisiry are the
departments of forests, environ-
ment and agriculture to name
three.

Like our present ministries, each
one of these departments would be
responsible for the management of
4 particular product or concern.
And like our present ministries,
each one of these departments
would make the rules for its par-
ticular area of concern. The Minis-
try of Lands (which, by the way,
would be equipped with a com-
plete land inventory much ilke a
municipal zoning map) would use
the rules developed by each depart-
ment to manage the province,

Under this system, the value of
the land, not the products the land
produces, would be the deciding

factor in determining how a par-
ticular piece of land would be
used. If a site is best suited for

agricultural, you don’t build a
factory. If it’s best suited for log-
ging, you don’t cut the trees down
and plant com. This sound’s
almost like something we have...
but we don’t. The key is that this
super ministry would place the
value of the land before all else.
Drastic? Yes, it is. But so is the
current situation. And the idea
described above would at least
address the biggest problem with
the management system we have.
It would provide a new manage-
ment system that manages the
resource — the land — and not
the products which that resource
produces, the trees. It would pro-
vide a land use strategy, based on
an accurate and up-to-date inven-
tory, for each product the land
produces, and this strategy would
‘be based on the:land’s capability
of producing a particular product.

Devise a system such as this, and
then we can start talking about
things like “multiple successional
use" and a system of forest tenure
that isn’t self-defeating.

If you’re not convinced, consider
this. Anyone who believes that the
land will take care of itself, that
the land doesn’t require any man-
agement at all, is living one step
away from reality. Someday these
people are going to wake up and
find there are no forests to manage
either. The soil is too acidic and
lacking in nutrients and simply
won’t grow anything worthwhile.

If in fact, then, our land is our
primary resource, can the forest .
industry expect to continue operat-
ing without a profit and loss state-
ment that details this primary
resource? Our equity in the land,
the nutrients in the soil, would be
detailed in such a statement so the
answer to this question should be
obvious... Not for long.

But this is exactly where we are
loday. We don’t have a system
which provides a profit and loss
Statement and we therefore have
no way of knowing if our forest
Management decisions, alloiting
tenure for example, are wise. It
would be wrong to say we are
harming the land in every instance,
In some case we may actually be
adding to the value of the land by
adding to the available nutrients,
But we can’t pat ourselves on the
back because we have mm way of
knowing. Just as we have no way
of knowing what harm we may
have caused our land over the past
100 years. ee -

reeng ay

FS EAT SRE EG TT SDS RETR GEES Ta Be GREER TT