Editorial: Council silent in Community Forest Dispute
By Spencer Hall
After news broke in late April that local mill Cedar Valley Holdings expects it will close its doors at the end of June due to what the company describes as a difficulty in acquiring an adequate amount of cedar from the Valemount Community Forest, one of the mill’s employees, Simon Heiniger got to work on a petition, which in part called for more transparency from VCF.
There were six requests within the petition, including a request for the creation of a formal guarantee that local timber would be made available to local businesses and the establishment of regular community consultation forums so that residents could ask questions and provide the community forest with direct feedback. Overall, the requests in the petition were reasonable and didn’t appear to be emotionally charged.
The petition itself garnered about 360 signatures within about three weeks and was presented to Valemount Council at its meeting on May 27th.
I can’t imagine I was the only person surprised when Council then received the petition without a word of discussion amongst themselves. Members of Council didn’t ask any clarifying questions or even express sentiments of sympathy for those 14 people who are reportedly about to lose their jobs. To Mayor Torgerson’s credit, he did thank Heiniger for collecting those signatures, but that was the only thing said from the Village’s side about this ongoing dispute.
While there is nothing wrong about how Council received the delegation, I find it disappointing that Councillors did not try to engage with Heiniger. I imagine at least one if not more members of Council likely read a print copy of his petition after it was distributed around town. Here was an opportunity for them to engage with him and show they were listening to his concerns — which numerous Valemount residents clearly share — and none of them took it.
Heiniger told The Goat this week that Valemount CAO Anne Yanciw has offered to discuss his concerns in an informal meeting with him, but I find it concerning that these conversations are happening behind closed doors, especially after Heiniger and hundreds more asked for further transparency from VCF.
At the end of the day, at least 14 people are about to lose their jobs and a local business is at risk of closing its doors for seemingly arbitrary reasons. Council must take the lead on this situation to clarify the claims being made about VCF. If local cedar is in fact being sent to Prince George to make pulp instead of supplying a local business with the materials it needs to operate, that is completely unacceptable, regardless of whether VCF is “in compliance” with its timber and fibre agreements with Cedar Valley Holdings.
Do we allow the community to undergo further economic damage as long as VCF is meeting its contracted agreements? Or do we demand more from our local government officials to hold VCF — an association with the mission to “develop and strengthen the economic diversity of the community while promoting the social well being of the residents in and around Valemount” — accountable?
Allowing 14 people to lose their long term jobs is the opposite of economic development. Legal proceedings or not, the community has the right to know if the claims being made about VCF are true. If they are, the Village and VCF need to engage directly with the community to reform the association so it is doing its job of strengthening our local economy, especially at a time where locals are already facing so much economic uncertainty.
The Village and Council still have an opportunity in the coming weeks to publicly address the concerns of the community when it comes to the community forest, it is imperative that they take it.
