Letter to the editor -
Dear editor,
This is in response to an item on CBC News about the decline of the woodland caribou in an interview with Ian Goudie on April 16. According to the news item, it was recommended to the Department of Environment by their own people many years ago, that in order to protect the woodland caribou they needed a buffer of nine kilometres of forest around their calving areas, but this was never built into the management plan.
I have been a member of the five-year planning committee for District 9 since it was established approximately 10 years ago. This was a process that was put in place by the Department of Forestry and Crown Lands so that the general public and interested parties could have some input in how our forests was managed.
While the concept was good, it never worked. Our forests were always managed to get the most jobs possible, the same way our fisheries was managed, and we all know how that turned out. What happens at the five-year planning committee is that the logging companies bring in their five-year harvesting plan, we argue a little, but in the end nothing is changed. Then it goes to the environment and other government departments, and to my knowledge it is just rubber-stamped.
A prime example. A member of this committee, who owns a hunting lodge has for many years along with my help, been trying to get a section of old growth forest, which was very important for the caribou for over wintering and a calving area protected, but to no avail. The company decided they wanted these few trees, and the government allowed them to harvest them.
The most important way to protect any species is to protect their habitant, and in this case, it was not done - the trees were cut to provide a few short-term jobs.
When a forest is cut it will not provide any more jobs for at least 60-100 years depending on the type of soil, while a species like the caribou can provide our residents with meat and recreation. The hunting lodges also can provide millions of dollars and badly needed jobs for the economy of rural NL forever, but only if it is managed right.
The people who are most knowledgeable about the caribou are the people that are on the ground, and for years have been arguing that the caribou was in trouble because of habitant loss and the introduction of an unwanted species - the coyote.
In a press conference last year, Minister Charlene Johnson dismissed these arguments, and promised a $15-million, five-year study to find out exactly what we already knew. She now blames the black bear and the coyote, but never mentioned the habitant loss.
There is more to the forest than cutting trees for human consumption.
I am not a caribou hunter, but I am an avid outdoor person, a nature lover and a protector of the environment.
If you look at our history, you will find we are good at destroying species such as the Beothucks and the great AWK, just to mention two, but not so good with protecting them.
Hopefully, the next generation will do a better job.
(Retired) Capt Wilfred Bartlett
Brighton, NL
.jpg)
.jpg)
