COMMON GROUND AND CONFLICT iN TEE STRUGGLE OVER THE USE OF FORESTS AND LABOUR RU BRITISH COLUMBIA: THE CASE OF GREENPEACE AND THE PULP, PAPER, AND WOODWORKERS OF CANADA
Alexander Simon
B.A. State University of New York ai Albany 1988
MA. State University of New York ai Albany 1991
THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF
THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPRY
in the Department
of
Sociology and Anthropology
@ Alexander Simon 2000 Simon Fraser University February 2000
Ali rights rrsrrvrd. This work müy not br rqroduccxi in whok cir in put, by photocop? or other meuns. without permission of the author. National tibrary Bibliothèque nationale 191 of Canada du Canada Acquisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliographie SeMces services bibliographiques 395 Wdlingtcm Street 395, rue Wellington OtiiwON K1AûN4 Oniwa ON K1A ON4 CensQ CaMds
The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive licence allowing the exclusive permettant à la National Library of Canada to Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de reproduce, loan, distribute or seU reproduire, prêter, distribuer ou copies of this thesis in microform, vendre des copies de cette thèse sous paper or electronic fonnats. la forme de microfiche/film, de reproduction sur papier ou sur format électronique.
The author retaias ownership of the L'auteur conserve la propriété du copyright in this thesis. Neither the droit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse. thesis nor substantial exûacts fiom it Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels may be printed or otherwise de celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés reproduced without the author' s ou autrement reproduits sans son permission. autorisation. Absuact
According to James O'Connor, the second contradiction of capitalism stems from
capital's tendency to destroy its own conditions of production (i.e., labour. nature, and
infrastructure). O'Connor asserts that the crises engendered b y capital kt exploitation of
production conditions creates the potential for cooperation between the environmental
movernent and the labour movement. This dissenation utilizes O'Connor's theory as a
framework for analysing how Greenpeace and the Puip. Paper, and Woodworkers of Canada
(PPWC)have responded to capital's dual exploitation of forests and forest sector workers.
Data were gathered utilizing several research methods including open ended interviews with
woodworken and environrnentalists. a case study of a corporate propaganda campaign, and
discourse analysis. Suppon was found for O'Connor's propositions regarding the positive
relationship between capital's exploitation of labour and nature as well as his major propositions reyarding the relationship between capital and the state in the production of commodities. O'Connor's treatment of social movements needs to be refined as he irnplies that social movements respond to objectively perceived crises created by capitalist exploitation of land and labour. As theorizcd by Alain Touraine, the policies of Greenpeace and the PPWC have "mutated" to adapt to changing social conditions. However, the data gathered for this study indicate that both woodworken and environmentalists subjectively
constnict their undentandings of the crises engendered by capital's dual exploitation of
labour and nature from a multitude of sources. Moreover, both capital and the state attempt
to quash significant social change by engaging in propaganda campaigns designed to
reaffirm the dominant ideology which justifies the existing smcture of the forest industry. ... 111 Therefore, the responses that social movements have to capital's dual exploitation of labour and nature remain highly unpredictable. DEDKA TION
To my good friend. Kenai. Completing this project would not have been possible without the help and cooperation of a great many people. My cornmittee members, Ian Angus, Marilyn Gates, and Karl Froschauer provided excellent support and feedback throughout the entire process. 1 thank al1 of you very much.
Many of the PPWC members who agreed to take part in this study were anonyrnous interviewees. Therefore, it is not possible to identify some of the individuals who made the rreatest contributions to this dissenation However. yoiir participation is greatly appreciated. I am also grateful for the cooperation of National P.P.W.C. President Garry Worth, former National President Stan Shewaga, National Forestry Officer Sean Reel, and National Environmental Officer, Fred Henton.
Many people frorn the environmental community also took time out of their busy schedules to participate in this study. I would like to thank Karen Mahon. Tamara Stark. Tzeporah Berman, David Peerla, Greg McDade, Will Horter, Mitch Anderson, John Werring, loe Foy, Herb Hammond, and Trevor Jones. 1 would also like to thank Susan Hammond and Colleen McCrory for providing very useful data on the Forest Alliance and Share BC.
Professors Michael Feller, Michael M'GonigIe. and M. Patricia Marchak, have al1 conducted valuable research on B.C.'sforests. Moreover, their participation in this study greatly enhanced the quality of the dissertation.
1 would also like to thank Rod Webb and Gus Abel for participatins in this project and for having the courage to express their opinions in a volatile atmosphere.
Finally, I would like to thank my wife Cindy for al1 of her help and for sharing the many adventures we have had since we packed up the truck and ieft New York. TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTIONe~~ee~~~~~~~~~~~~a~~e~~e~~eeeeeeeeeeeeI
Research Procedures
Recruitment of Respondents
List of Respondents interview Techniques
Data Analysis
Biases and Limitations
Ethical Considerations
Summary of Chapters
vii O'Connor and the Two Paths to Socialism
The Fint Contradiction of Capitalism
The Second Contradiction of Capitalism
Criticisms OF O'Connor's Theory
The Forest lndustry in B.C. and the Second Contradiction
CHAPTER THREE: PRIVATE INTERESTS AND PUBLIC FORESTS...... 65
Role of the State
NA FTA
The AAC
Ptmiuctiun of Labour
Relationship Between Capital's Exploitation of Labour and Capital's Exploitation of Nature
Capital's Self-lmposed Barriers to Accumulation
CRAPTER FOUR: RESPONSES TO THE LECITMATION CRISIS BY CAPITAL AND THE STATE...... o.~~.....8~....8...... o~...... 8~..96
The Dominant Ideology
The State's Response to the Legitimation Crisis
Capital's Response to the Legitimation Crisis
The Forest Alliance The Corporate Discourse
Lillooet BC: A Case Study of Corporate Propagandr
Share BC and the Use of Physical Intimidation
The Forest Alliance Cornes to Lillooet
Counter-ldeology at the Local Level
Popular Support Tor Corporate Front Croups
CHAPTER FIVE: COUNTER-IDEOLOGLES AND ALTERNATIVE WAYS OF
STRUCTURiNG THE FOWST INDUSTRY ~mbb#mbe****a*18bbabb~~~bm~~*136
Alternative Ways of Utilizing Land and Labour in BC
Partial Cutting vs. Clerrcutting
Value Added Manufacturing
The Neo-Liberal Critique
Reduced Work Week
The Envitonmental Movement
The Genesis of Greenpeace
From Grassroots to Multi-National NGO
Greenpeace's Labour Policies
Greenpeace's Forest Campaign in BC
Mutation within the Environmental Movement CHAPTER SEVEN: MUTATION WITHIN THE LABOUR M0VEMXNT~~~rnern~ern~~~.195
The IWA: From Radical Union to Business Union
The Genesis of the Pulp Paper and Woodworkers of Canada
Politically Diverse Leadership
World View of the PPWC Rank-and-File
Official Policy Statements of the PPWC
Decreasing Exploitation Through Reduced Work Hours
Mutation of Social Movements
Unpredictable Consequences of Dual Exploitation
The Fletcher-Challenge Strike
The Limits of Addressing One Form of Exploitation
Barriers to a Labour-Environmentalists Alliance
Cultural Barriers?
Institutional Barriers O'Connor Reconsidered lmplications of ihis Study MAPS AND PBOTOGRAPES
Cornparison of old growth and second growth forests...... 144-145
Map of Great Bear fiinforest ...... 271
Photographs of Timber Dependent Cornmunitien...... 282-283
xii CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
" The issues of ecummic and social justice and ecological justice have surfaced as in nu uther period in history. It is increasiniply dear that they are, in .fact, hvo sides uf the same historicnl process" James O'Contior
Currently British Columbia is faced with an economic crisis, one manifestation of which has been a drastic decline of Forest sector employment. The region is also faced with an ecological crisis. one symptom of this crisis is the destmction of old growth forest eco- systems on an unprecedented scale. Academics. journalists, (e.3..M'Gonigle and Parfin
1994) and professional foresters (e.~.,Hammond. 1992) have sugyested reforms that ivould both create more forest sector jobs and reduce corporate exploitation of forest eco-systems.
While these reforms would crcate more forest sector jobs and decrease the amount of environmental degradation caused by the forest industry. these reforms would also reduce the political and economic power of timber capital ists. Therefore. timber corporations have a vesred interest in maintainin!: the status quo. Through lobbying organizations such as the
Council of Forest Industries. public relations enterprises e.g.. the Forest Alliance and Share
B.C., and conservative think-tanks such as the Fraser Institute, timber corporations are united and organized in their efforts to preserve their economic, political. and ideological dominance.
Labour unions and environmental organizations constitute the major opposition to the corporate agenda. Unions, have seen a decline in membership and political power in the last -3 two decades (Marchak, 1995). hlthouph environmental organizations have become more organized and effective at resisting corporate exploitation of forests in recent years, their political and economic power is slight relative to the resources that tirnber corporations cm niuster. Moreover, timber corporations have spent millions of dollars to create and perpetuate animosity between these two groups. It will be argued here that the erosion of working class living standards and the destruction of forest eco-systems are social problerns that cannot be addressed separately. Funhermore, it will be argued that implemrnting the above rnentioned industry reforms requires cooperation between these two social movemen ts.
James O'Connor's theory of the second contradiction of capitalism will be utilized as a framework for understanding the pol itical economy of B .C's forest industry and the policies and actions of Greenpeace and the Pulp, Paper and Woodworkers of Canada
(PPWC). O'Connor has theorized that the degree to which capital exploits labour is directly related to the degree to which capital exploits nature (O'Connor 199 1 A. p. 9). He contends that the contradictions engendered by capital's dual exploitation of labour and nature create the possibility for alliances between labour and other social movements. which in turn could create the conditions for the transition from a liberal democracy to a socialist democracy.
The theory of the second contradiction will be applied to studying the process through which corporate restructuring led to a shonage of forest sector jobs and the unsustainable utilization of forests. The focus will then turn to how capital's increased exploitation of labour and nature has affected the policies of Greenpeace and the PPWC and how these organizations have been able to find a certain degree of common ground. Finally, the possibilities for a labour-environmentalist alliance between forest sector workers and the various environmental organizations will be explored.
Researc h Procedures
The economic and ecological changes that have occurred in B.C. during the past several decades have been well documented by others (e.g.. Barnes and Hayter 1997;
Hammond. 1997; Marchak. 1995; Marchak, 1983; May. 1998; M'Gonigle and Parfin, 1994),
The aim of this dissertation is to test to what degree. the actions taken bv the social movements being studied. suppon James O'Connor's theory of the second contradiction of capitalism. Therefore. a major soal is to document the actions and policies of Greenpeace and the Pulp. Paper. and Woodworkers of Canada (PPWC) and to gain access to the actors' perceptions of the political economy and ecology of the forests and forest industry and the reasoning behind the policies and actions of these two social rnovements. Thus. open-ended field interviews with individuals associated with the labour rnovement and/or the environmental movement was considered the most appropriate research technique For this study. Field interviews were conducted with persons who have been influential in shaping the labour and environmental policies of the PPWC. eg. national otricers (see below interviewee list). Thirty-two rank and file PPWC members. Le.. union members who do not occupy national offices, were also interviewed. The nuo persons currently ninning
Greenpeace's Canadian forest campaign were interviewed as well as two former ernployees of the Vancouver branch of Greenpeace, who were instrumental in shaping the forest campaign (see below interviewee kt). Primary literanire consisting of publications by the
PPWC and Greenpeace were also used as indicators of the respective groups' political goals 4
and tactics. Secondary literature on the forest industry in B.C..the history of woodworker's
unions, and the emeqence of corporate public relations enterprises, were used to describe
the history and contemporary context of the current debate regarding capital's exploitation of
land and labour. The secondary literature was augmented by interviewing academics who
have done research on the politicai economy andior ecoloyy of BCsforest industry (scc
below interviewee list).
Chapter four includes a case study of the events that transpired in Lillooet, B.C. after the Sierra Legal Defence Fund alleged that Ainsworth Lumber Company had enyaged in multiple violations of the Forest Practices Code. My wife and 1 resided in Lillooet for three years. She was employed as the region's mental health worker and 1 taught courses through the local extension of the University Colleye of the Cariboo. Both of us were very active in organizing and participating in community events. Thus, in addition to conducting open ended interviews, data were gathered through participant observation at local public meetings. Local people who had direct experience with corporate front groups and environmentalists from the Valhalla Society, the Sierra Legal Defence Fund, and Western
Canada Wildemess Cornmittee, were all interviewed regarding their experiences with corporate front groups (see below interviewee kt). This data was augmented by investigations conducted by the Library of Parliament, the popular press, and the literature published by corporate front groups. Intemal memos from Ainsworth Lumber Company and
Rozenhari and Robertson were also provided by anonymous sources.
Recruitment of Respondents
The national PPWC offcers were contacted by phone and asked if they would 5 consent to an interview for this project. Consent foms were then either mailed or faxed to them. The interviews with the national oficen were either conducted in person or by phone.
Since no list of the PPWC's membership exists, rank-and-file respondents were recniited by attending union meetings in different locations throughout B.C. There are twelve PPWC locals which represent rnillworkers. One of these locals. Local 4 of Prince Rupert. was involved in negotiations regarding Skeena Cellulose at the timr of this study. The local's president understandably did not gant permission to attend the local's meeting as they had a very busy agenda. Thus, eleven of the twelve locals were visited. At each local, before speaking to the mernbership. the membersliip voted on whether or not I would be allowed to address the meeting. Fortunately, of the eleven locals visited. al1 of them granted approval to address the meeting. The membership also voted regarding whether or not I would be allowed to sit in on the meeting.
Some of the locals granted permission while others did not feel cornfortable discussing union business in the presence of a non-member. In the event that I was asked to leave after addressiny the meeting regarding the study, consent forms and subject feedback foms were left behind along with a self-addressed envelope. In other cases, I was invited to attend the meeting and have members sign consent forms after the meeting. In the latter case, the number of persons who agrred to participate was much higher. In some locals, as many as twenty people agreed to participate, the lowest number of individuals who agreed to participate was three. In order to control for any particular local being over-represented in the interview data, no more than three people from any one local were interviewed. If the number of potential interviewees was higher than three for a given local, then three respondents were chosen using a random numben table. Of the thirty-three respondents selected, one could not be reached to schedule an interview, and there was only a pool of three potential respondents from his particular local, therefore, the total number of rank-and- file PPWC members interviewed was thirty-two. One of the members requested to be interviewed in person, so the interview was conducted at PPWC Local 8 in Nanaimo. The other rank-and-file members were al1 interviewed by telephone.
The four Greenpeace respondents were contacted by telephone. Al1 of them agreed to participate in the project and were given consent forms and subject feedback forms. One of the interviews was conducted at the Greenpeace office in Vancouver. anoiher at a Vancouver coffee shop on Commercial Drive in Vancouver. the other two interviews were conducted by phone. The interviews conducted with ernployees of Sierra Legal Defence Fund and the
Western Canada Wi lderness Committee were conducted either in person or by phone. All of the interviews wit h academics were conducted in person.
List of Respondents
PPWC Members Interviewed:
Garry Worth, National President of the PPWC (interviewed October 30, 1996 at P.P.W.C. National Office in Vancouver and by phone on May 1 1, 1998)
Stan Shewaga, National President of the PPWC (retired) (interviewed December 13, 1996, P.P.W .C. Local 8 Nanaimo)
Sean Reel, National Forestry Officer of the PPWC (interviewed by telephone July 9, 1997)
Fred Henton, National Environmental Officet of the PPWC (interviewed by telephone July 1 7, 1997) 32 anonymous PPWC members (al1 interviews conducted by telephone except one conducted at PPWC Local 8 in Nanaimo)
Greenpeace Employees Interviewed:
Karen Mahon, Greenpeace Canadian Forest Campaign Worker (interviewed December 3, 1996. in Vancouver coffee shop)
Tamara Stark, Greenpeace Canadian Forest Campaign Worker (interviewed November 20, 1996 Greenpeace Vancouver office)
Tzeporah Berman, Greenpeace International. San Francisco Office (interviewed by telephone March 20. 1997)
David Peerla, Former Greenpeace Canadian Forest Campaign Worker (interviewed by telephone October 14. 1997)
Sierra Legal Defence Fund Employees Interviewed:
Greg McDade, Executive Director of Sierra Legal Defence Fund (interviewed December 1 7. 1996 at SLDF office. Vancouver)
Will Horter, Lawyer for Sierra Legal Defence Fund Mitch Anderson, Staff Scientist for Sierra Legal Defence Fund John Werring, Staff Scientist for Sierra Legal Defence Fund (Horter, Anderson, Werring interviewed as a yroup, author's home in Lillooet. B.C.)
Western Canada W ilderness Cornmittee Joe Foy, Executive Director of National Carnpaigns (interviewed March 1, 1997 by telephone)
The Valhalla Society Colleen McCrory (interviewed November 17, 1997 by telephone)
Silva Forest Foundation Herb Hammond, Registered Professional Forester (interviewed May 7, 1997 by telephone) Academics Interviewed: Michael M'Gonigle, Professor of Law and Environmental Studies, University of Victoria (interviewed at University of Victoria, December 12. 1996)
M. Patricia Marchak. Professor Department of Sociology and Anthropology. UBC (interviewed at Professor Marchak's residence November 10, 1997)
Michael Feller, Associate Professor, Forest Sciences Department, UBC (interviewed at University of British Columbia. November 10, 1 997)
Other Respondents Interviewed for Case Study and Pre-Test of Ruak-and-File lnterview Schedule:
Rod Webb, Electrician and Lillooet resident (interviewed at author's residence, April 25, 1997)
Gus Abel, Manager of Tyax Lodge (interviewed by phone. January 28. 1997) 1. W A. millworker (anonymous) non-union millworker (anonymous) non-union logger (anonymous)
Interview Techniques
Two field interviewing techniques were utilized: the general interview guide approach and a standardized open ended interview (Patton 1990, pp. 280-287). The interviews that were conducted with the PPWC1s national officers, environmental activists, academics and those individuals who were interviewed for the Lillooet case study. utilized the general interview guide approach. Prior to the interview, a list of topics to be covered was discussed with the respondent and used as a rough guide for the interview process.
Either pany involved was allowed to discuss areas that were not included on the original list.
Respondents were also informed that they had the latitude to refrain from discussing any topic. None of the interviewees declined to discuss any of the proposed topics. Relevant primary and secondary literature was sometimes used as a means of gaining access to the respondents memory, e.g.,newspaper clippings regarding certain protests. etc. These interviews were either conducted by phone or in person. The PPWC's President, Garry
Worth was interviewed on rwo separate occasions (October 30, 1996 and May 1 1. 1998) in order to discuss the strike against Fletcher Challenge and the PPWC's statement of support for an IWA blockade against Greenpeace, both of which occurred while this study was in progress. Al1 of the interviews. including telephone interviews. were tape-recorded. A combination of the seneral interview guide approach and a standardized open ended interview questions were utilized with rank-and-file PPWC members. Standardized questions enabled the respondent's answers to a series of identical questions to be directly compared.
Data Analysis
The topics discussed when the seneral interview guide approach varied greatly according to the respondent's experiences and area(s) of expertise. Notes were usually taken during the interview and the conversations were also tape recorded. The tapes were later re- played and funher notes were taken and some portions of the interviews were transcribed.
The topics covered during the standardized open ended interview varied to a slight degree but the conversation tended to focus on the standardized questions (see appendix A).
During the interview, notes were taken and a form was filled out with basic descriptive data such as the respondent's gender, date of binh, years of education, parent's occupation etc.
(see appendix A ). The tapes were later replayed and the respondents answen were either directly quoted or paraphrased in individual squares of a grid, which enabled the responses given b y the interviewees to the sarne questions. to be directly compared.
Biases and Limitations
Persons being interviewed were be asked to recall events that occurred as far back as twenty years ago. This presented the possibility that people did not accurately recall the events in question. In order to control for distortions in rnemory, data gathered from personal recollections was. whenever possible. triangulated with data gathered from primary and secondary l iterature.
The respondents who were told that their statements would be attributed directly to them may have been hesitant io publicly express certain opinions. Furthemore. some of the respondents, i.e.,the PPWC's National Officers and the members of Greenpeace were likely more "media savvy" than the general public. In the case of Greenpeace. this limitation was perhaps partially overcorne by interviewing people such as David Peerla, who is no longer employed by Greenpeace, and by reviewing secondary literature which contained the results of anonymous interviews with Greenpeace employees e.g., (Eyerman and lamison. 1989).
In the case of the PPWC this limitation was partially overcome by interviewing rank-and-file members whose anonymity was guaranteed.
Although the national officers of the PPWC are elected annually by popular election and subject to recall at any time, there is the possibility that their opinions on certain matters
may not reflect the opinions of the general membership. This limitation was overcome by
interviewing rank- and-file PPWC members. The manner in which the-rank-and-file
memben were selected was not at random as a complete membenhip list was not available.
Respondents were recruited from meetings at the various union locals. Local presidents estimated that at a typical meeting about 5- 10% of the membership anended. Thus, the
interviewees were more likely to be more informed and active in the union than the general
membership. However, if this is the case, then the sample also more likely to represent those
PPWC members who are most likely to participate in etTecting change within the union and
in society at large.
Ethical Considerations
Prior to engaging in the interview, the rank-and-file PPWC members were provided
with a consent form (see appendix A) which guaranteed that their statements would be held
in confidence and that their participation in this project would rernain anonymous. In order
to protect their anonymity, interview dates are not rrcorded next to quotes and other
information which rnight be used to identify these respondents was omitted. Those
respondents whose anonymity was not guaranteed were ~ivena form (see appendix A) which guaranteed their right to edit statements which they had made during the interview process
prior to the distribution of the final draft of the dissertation. All respondents were provided
with a subject feedback fom (see appendix A). The tirst draft of this project was mailed to
individual respondents who were not granted anonymity. These respondents were given the opportunity to revise comments they had made during their interviews. Two of these
respondents requested minor revisions. Upon completion of the dissertation, a copy of the
final draft will be mailed to each individual PPWC local that participated in this project and
to those respondents who were not guaranteed anonymity.
Summary OC Chapters
The dissertation is divided into nine chapten. The second chapter will begin by summarizing theories other than eco-socialism which pcovide a critique of capital's exploitation of land andor labour. The theory of the second contradiction of capitalism will then be described in detail as well as the major criticisrns of O'Connor's approach. In the third chapter. the theory of the second contradiction will be used as a framework for analysing the relationship between timber capitalists and the state and how the current economic and ecological problems are a result of the joint restnicturing of the forest industry bv timber capitalists and the provincial sovernment. In the founh chapter. a case studv of the events that transpired in Lillooet will be detailed as a means of demonstrating how corporate front groups. e.g.. the Forest Alliance. Share 0.C and the Soo Coalition for
Sustainable Forests. seek to preclude a labour-environmrntalist alliance and reaffirrn the dominant ideology which legitirnizes the present structure of the forest industry. In chapter five the major critiques of the forest industry will be summarized and alternative ways of structurin~the forces and relation of production will be discussed. Chapter six details the genesis and evolution of Greenpeace and provides a critique of the organization's Canadian
Forest campaign. Chapter seven discusses the evolution of the labour movement in the forest sector and also details the history and policies of the PPWC. Chapter eight details how common policies between Greenpeace and the PPWC led to a certain degree of cooprration between these two social movements. Chapter eipht also summarizes other works on barriers to a labour-environmentaiist alliance and provides a critique of these works. Strategies for overcoming barriers the a labour-environmentalist alliance are also discussed in this chapter.
The concluding chapter discusses the degee to which the findings of this project are consistent with the propositions made by O'Connor in his theory of the second contradiction of capitalism. The broader implications of this study are also discussed. CHAPTER TWO
O'CONNOR'S GREEN MARXISM
"Frum the standpoint 4ahigher sucio-economic formation, inJividual private uwnership uf the eatth will appear just as much in bad taste as the ownership of one human being by unother. Evem a whule suciety, u natiun, or al1 cuntemporary societies taken tugetikcr are nui the absolute uwners of the earth. Tkey ore onlj its uceupants, its beneficiuries, und like goud paterfamilias have tu leove it in impruveù cunùition tu thefollowing
generatiun " Karl Marx
Alternative Theoretical Approaches
Aithough environmental degradation is not a new phenomenon (Foster, 1994). the accelerated pace at which environmental degradation has occurred during the 1st half of the twentieth century has caused alarm among many individuals. This, in turn, has led to the development of a wide variety of theory based critiques of existing social and economic structures. It will be arsued below that O'Connor's theory of the second contradiction of capitalism is the most appropriate theory for undentanding the relationship between capital's exploi;ation of nature and labour and where the interests of labour activists and environmental activists intersect.
However, there are other issues which are yermane to this study which are oot addressed by O'Connor's theory. Therefore. prior to detailing O'Connor's theory of the second contradiction of capitalism and discussing why this pmicular theoretical approach is best suited to the main topic of this dissertation, several other theories of the relationship between capital and the state, (Offe, 1975) and the causes of environmental degradation 15
(Bookchin, 1993; Daly and Cobb, 1994; MacNeil. Winsemius and Yakushiji. 199 1; Mellor.
19%; Mies and Shiva, 1993; Naess, 1972) will be discussed.
In the early 1970s, the Norwegian philosopher. Arne Naess coined the term "deep ecology" (Naess. 1972) to describe an emeqing philosophy which proposes "biospherical egalitarianism" as an alternative to the dominant Cartesian dualistic world view. The
Cartesian world view maintains that humans are thinking subjects surrounding by material objects. i.e.,non-human life forms (Evernden, 1993). These objects have value only to the extent that they can satisfy hurnan needs and desires. In contrast to this anthropocentric world view, Naess assens that humans are merely one of many species that inhabit the eanh.
Although he recognizes the need of humans to kill individual members of other species in order to survive. he contends that al1 species have "the rydright ro /ive and IO hko.smm "
(Naess 1972. p. 96). From the perspective of deep ecology, snthropocentric justifications for not destroyins non-human species and eco-systems (eg,the potential for developing new dmgs from old growth tree species) are unnecessary as al1 eco-systems and species have inherent wotth.
In Western capitalist societies the main priority which is taken into account prior to engaging in a project like building a dam or logging a forest is to determine to what degree the project will increase the material wealth available to humans. Concems regarding the well-being of non-human species are either completely ignored or are given an extremely low priority. The priorities of deep ecologists are radically different than the dominant anthropocentric world view. Prior to appropriating resources from the earth, deep ecologists assert that it must fint be determined whether or not the proposed activity endangen the 16 welfare of other species and also if this project will actually enhance the quality of human life or merely increase the human standard of living, Le., add to the amount of material resources consumed without any appreciable effect on the actual quality of life. This, of course. does not mean that hurnans cannot engage in material interchanges with external nature. However, human activities such as hunting, resource extraction, agriculture etc. should not been done in a manner which endangers the existence and well-beins of other species.
Arne Naess and George Sessions have detailed eight principles of deep ecology.
Several of these principles are discussed below. The tïrst principle is, "The well-being and flourishiny of human and non-human life on Earth have value in themselves (synonyms: intrinsic value, inherent wonh). These values are independent of the usefulness of the non- human world for human purposes" (Naess 1993, p. 197). Naess and Sessions contend that both the present size of the human population and the amount of material resources consurned by individuals, panicularly by individuais in First World nations. poses a threat to the survival of non-human species. Therefore, the founh principle of deep ecology States.
"The flourishing of human life is compatible with a substantial decrease of the human population. The flourishiny of non-human life requires such a decrease" (Naess 1990, p. 88)
In addition to a reduction in the human population, individual consumption levels must also be reduced. According to Naess, a routine task such as preparing a meal requires as much as forty times the energy in Fint World nations as Third World nations (Naess 1990, p. 93).
Therefore, he contends that the burden to reduce consumption levels rests most heavily upon citizens of First World nations. Deep ecologists value cultural diversity as well as biological diversity. Naess contends that a reduction in the human population will actually protect cultural diversity :
The history of humanity is of vast diversity of cultures with rather modest populations. Contemporary destruction of cultures does not proceed because of lack of humans. Admittedly, this point is rather abstract, but it allows for an important long-range, global perspective: the goal of a number of people mal! rnougli to avoid giyantic bureaucraties and insufferable crowdiny, with easy access to free nature and spacious room for every activity consistent with 'live and let live' (Naess 1990, p. 92).
The principles of deep ecology are also critical of existing economic and ideological structures. The sixth principle of deep ecology reads. "Policies must therefore be changeci.
These policies affect basic economic, technological. and ideological structures. The resulting state of affairs will be deeply different from the present" (Naess 1993, p. 197). Rational and irrational policies and behaviour are judged within the context of deep ecology's world view.
Policy changes are considered ro be rational if thev tend to promote the sustainabilitv and well-being of human and nonhuman communities, they are irrational if they have the opposite effect.
For instance, Naess believes that the growth imperaiive of the capitalist system is irrational. He maintains that the GNPs (gross national products) of nation States should be reduced to ecoloyically sustainable levels (Naess. 1989). which of course directly contradicts the neo-li beral definition of "progress." Naess also favours local production and political autonomy over global free trade and centralized governments (Naess, 1 972). He contends that local production and sel f-pvemment protects cultural diversity . Moreover, in most cases local production for local needs requires less energy consumption than producing products and shipping them to far off markets. Althouyh Naess clearly favours local political 18 autonomy in principle, as will be discussed below, he has recently (Naess. 1997) expressed some reservations regardiny the ecological implications of complete local autonomy.
Some social activists (eg, Bari 1997). who subscribe to the principles of deep ecoiogy, have reached the conclusion that the abolition of capitrlism is necessary in order to rnsure the survival and weil- being of both human and nonhuman communities. The principies of deep ecology have even led some social activists to form alliances with forest workers ( Bari. 1 994; Bari 1 997. pp 145- 149). Converselv, other social activists have combined principles of deep ecology with neo-liberal econoinics and solutions to population growth which can be characterized as neo-Malthusian ( Foreman. 199 1 ; Bookchin and
Foreman 199 1 ).
The arsuments put forth by many who advocate restructuring the manner in which both forests and the labour of forest sector workers are utilized in B.C. (eg,M'Gonigle and
Parfin. 1994), emphasize how the reforms they propose will benefit humans. This does not necessarily mean that these authors have an anthropocentric world view. However, they live in a society in which anthropocentrisrn is the dominant world view. Therefore, in order to have their arguments appeal to a large audience, advocates of wildemess preservation often couch their arguments in terms of what utility non-human nature has for humans. Naess has constructed an alternative world view which frees those who seek to effect social change from the burden of justifying biodiversity on the grounds that it will raise the material standard of living of humans. Moreover, Naess provides a powerful critique of capitalist culture which is very germane to issues discussed in later chapters such as the tendency within capitalist societies to equate high levels of production and consumption with a quality 19 lifestyle and using such mesures as GNP as an indicator of social well-being (Naess. 1989).
Hennan Daly, who was a senior econornist at the World Bank and John Cobb Jr.. a theoloyy professor, have proposed social and economic reforms whic h they contend would lead to an economic order which "would be just, participatory, and sustainable" (Daly and
Cobb 1994. p. 20). According to the authors, the manner in which mainstream economists conceptualize material resources is a major barrier to achieving a sustainabie econorny The authors have criticized mainstream economists (e.g.,Julian Simon) for engaging in the
"fallacy of misplaced concreteness". that is. treating concrete entities such as natural resources as if they are products of the human minci and therefore unlimited. Thus. according to the authors. "Economics as a discipline floats free from the physical world" (Daly and
Cobb. 1994 p. 99). The economist Julian Simon iakes a very extreme position regarding the abi lity of humans to perpetually produce and consume more products. In regard to population yrowth, Simon (Simon, 1990) contends that when faced with barriers to economic growth, humans have always found technological solutions to these barrien (eg, fossil fuels as a substitute for depleted forest resources). Therefore, population growth is not a barrier to economic growth. In fact, population growth will produce more humans, which. in tum, leads to the creation of more minds which can conceive of technological solutions to overcome short-term barriers to continued economic expansion.
Daly and Cobb contend that perpetual economic growth is not physically possible and that the continued survival of both human and nonhuman communities presupposes a drastic reduction in either per capîta resource consumption or a reduction in the human population.
They further assert that they are in "basic agreement" with the eight principles of Deep Ecology (see above) as stated by Arne Naess and George Sessions.
They reject both social ism and laissez-faire capi talism on the grounds that both economic systems are cornmitted to industrialism and large scale growth. Daly and Cobb advocate reducing the scale of the global econorny to the "biocentric optimum", that is the level of production and consumption "that is best for all forms of life... the biocentric optimum is likely to be smaller than the anthropocentric optimum. How much smaller we cannot say" (Daly and Cobb 1994. p. 256). In regard to logging and other forms of resource extraction the authors state that these activities would continue, albeit, on a smaller scale:
Commercial use would also continue [in addition to recreational use of forests and other wilderness areas]. Logging should be more rcologically managed and cuttiny should be less than growth. but logging would continue. except in the expanded areas designated for wilderness (Dalv and Cobb 1994. p. 155).
Daly and Cobb cal1 for a radical restruçturing of the global econorny in order to reduce the scale of the economy to the "biocentric optimum." lnstead of capitalists competing with other capitalists on a global scale and workers competing with other worken on a global scale, the authors maintain that individual nations should strive to become self- sufficient. in order to enable individual nations to beeome self-sufficient, international free trade should be abandoned and local producers should be protected from foreign cornpetition by tariffs. Daly and Cobb envision many small businesses, many of thern worker owned, competing at the national level with pvernment interference to prevent the development of monopolies and environmental degradation. Al1 businesses that utilized land (both public and private) would be taxeci for utilizing the land. If a person "improved" the land. cg., increased the fertility of the soi1 of agricultural land, then their taxes would be reduced. If a person degraded the land. e.g, over-grazing grasslands or over-cutting forests. then their taxes would be increased to a degree that would create a disincentive to over-exploiting the land. While the authors clearly advocate strong state interference in the production and marketing of goods, they contend that the market is a better method ihan centralized state planning for anticipating and meeting the consumption needs of society :
If one dislikes centralized bureaucratie decision makiny then one must accept the market and profit motive, if not as a positive pood then as the lesser of two evils. A third alternative (as opposed to varyiny mixes of the two basic ones) has not been identitied (Daly and Cobb 1994. p. 49).
Daly and Cobb provide a very useful critique of mainstream econornic thousht
Moreover. tliey have provided a critique of how mainstieam economic thought has intluenced contemporary capitalist culture. One of the cornerstoncs of liberal theory is the assumption that each individual seltïshly pursuing their own economic interests is the best method of obtaininy the mauiniurn possible social benefits from the exploitation of material resources. This has justified the unbridled pursuit of material wealth without any regard for how these actions affect fellow humans (not to mention non-humans) and without any feeling of obliyation to alleviate the pain and suffering of others. Prior to liberalism becoming the dominant ideology in Western societies. greed existed. but the selfish pursuit of one's own economic interests was not widely condoned:
.. . . .there cmbe no doubt that the economic theory built on this anthropoloyy has encourapd a less inhibited quest for personal sain in the business world. That does not mean that personal gain failed to play a large role in earlier generations. but only that there was a pervasive disapproval of making that one goal deteminative of how one lived and acted. Monks who took seriously their vows of poverty were usually admired more than successful merchants. Honor competed with wealth as a personal goal (Daly and Cobb 1 994, p. 89). 33 rii-
Like Naess and some environmental activists (e.g., Durninp, 1992), Daly and Cobb have criticized the consumerist values of capitalist culture. One of the main criticisms is that consumerism increases individual consurnption beyond the point of ecological sustainability.
Moreover, Daly and Cobb state that comparative studies between societies do not support the proposition that an increase in material consumption will lead to an increase in human happiness. They maintain that the drive to perpetually acquire more material wealth is a social construction, not an essential hurnan trait. Therefore. it is possible ta envision a society in which people both produce and consume less without a reduction in the overall quality of life. An implicit assurnption of many of the proposals for reforming B.C.'s forest industry (eg,Burda. Curran. Gale. and M'Gonigle 1997; Hammond 1992; Marchak. 1995;
Marchak, 1999; M'Gonigle and Parfin. 1994) is ihat a sustainable forest industry presupposes a willingness on the pan of forest sector workers to accept a decrease in their material standard of living. Critiques like Daly and Cobb's of the dominant ideoloyy, which equates increases in one's material standard of living with one's quality of life, are valuable in that they help to explain why the transition to a sustainable economy does not necessarily imply a society in which basic human needs and desires go unsatisfied.
Daly and Cobb's critique of mainstream economic thoupht provides valuable insights into the reasons behind the failure of economists and others to consider the ecological consequences of economic activities. However, in recent years, economists employed by some very influential international institutions (e.g.,The Tri-lateral
Commission, the World Bank) have expressed alarm at the rate at which natural resources are being depleted and the potential economic consequences of ecological problems such as ozone depletion and global waming. Neo-liberal approaches to the environmental crisis
focus their critique of capitalist production on how the environmental degradation that results
from the manufacturing process impairs the ability of the global capitalist system to
reproduce itself andlor continue to expand (MacNeill. Winsernius. and Yakushiji, 199 1 ).
Contemporary oeo-liberal environrnentalists are not different in kind from American wildlife conservationists at the beginning of the tweiitieth century. such as Theodore Roosevelt and
U.S. Chief Forester, Gifford Pinchot. These early conservationists whole heanedly endorsed
the free enterprise system and the comrnodification and Wise use" of external nature.
However, Pinchot and other early conservationists were disturbed by:
. . . .a sornewhat stanling realization: laissez-faire capitalism had the potential to produce a world without wildlife The market dictates of self-interest could no lonser, in the eyes of the budding conservationist, serve as an adequate basis for humanity's relationship to nature because..there was a perception that "capitalist democracy is biocidal" (Sandlos 1998, p. 43).
At the beginniny of the twentieth century, some of capitalism's major advocates were
concerned that unfettered capitalism presented a danger to the survival of big garne species
like the grizzly bear. In the Miyht of the twentieth century, some of capitalism's major
advocates are concemed that unfenered capitalism presents a danger to the survival of
capitalism.
These neo-liberal environmentalists characterize oceans, air, forests, and any other parts of
the environment that can be utilized to create wealth as "ecoloyical capital" (MacNeill,
Winsemius, and Yakushiji 199 1, pp. 58-59 ). Neo-liberals maintain that capitalism is the
preferred method of produciny and distributing material goods, however they contend that a
certain degree of regulation is required by nation States and international agreements, in 24 order to keep capitalism from destroying increasingly scarce ecological capital (e,g.,Gore
1993, p. 195).
Neo-liberal environmentalists (e.g., MacNeill, Winsemius, and Yakushiji, 199 1) assert that ecological capital should be exploitrd using "environmentally sustainable" technoiogy to ensure that future investments and profits are possible. While there is the acknowledgement that the perpetual expansion of the human population is not possible. it is assumed that perpetual economic growth is both possible and desirable. They contend that perpetual economic growth can be accomplished through resource conservation and by utilizing environmentally sustainable technology (MacNeill. Winsernius. and Yakushiji.
199 1 ). Although neo-liberai environmentalists may advocate more "equitf in the distribution of wealth within nations and between nations as a means of reducing environmental problems such as population growth (Brundtland, 1987). the emphasis remains on saving capitalism from its tendency to destroy itself by destroying the natural environment. Thus. neo-liberal approaches to environmental problems are usually limited to criticizing corporate and state policies that result in the inability of ecological capital to reproduce itself. In regard to forestry practices, the focus is on how state and corporate practices result in timber capitalists extemalizing their costs of production ont0 other industries, e.g., endangering commercial fisheries or endangering the entire global capitalist system by contributing to global warming. Thus, the primary concem of neo-liberal environmentalism appears to be saving the global capitalist system from destroying itself as opposed to creating a more just and democratic social order.
Daly and Cobb have asserted that Cartesian anthropocentrism has heavily influenced mainsueam economic thought. Thus, "For economic theory, value is to be found solely in the satisfaction of human desires" (Daly and Cobb, 1994). However, as some econornists have corne to realize that a scarcity of clean air. water. and other resources presents a barrier to capitalist accumulation, a new hierarchy appears to have emerged. The hierarchv privileges the survival and well-being of global capitalism over the survival and well-being of both certain segments of the human race and external nature. The neo-liberal hierarchy is not based on gender, race, or even on species; it is based on the ability of an individual, an eco-system, or a human community to produce and/or consume capitalistically produced goods. In the following memo. which U.S. Treasury Secretarv Lawrence Summers wrote while he was the Chief Econoinist for the World Bank. Summers clearly demonstrates a concern that environmental degradation poses a threat to capitalist accumulation in that it impairs the ability of humans to be producers and/or consumers of capitalistically produced
çoods. Although the World Bank would not provide the author with a copy of the original memo, an abridged version of the memo, which appeared in The Econpmist is quoted in full below :
Jost between you and me, shouldn't the World Bank be encouraging more rniyration of the dirty industries to the LDCs [Less Developed Countries]? 1 can think of three reasons: (1) The measurement of the costs of health-impairing pollution depends on the foregone earnings from increased morbidity and mortality. From this point of view a given amount of health-impairing pollution should be done in the country with the lowest cost, which will be the country of the lowest wages. 1 think the economic logic of dumping a load of toxic waste in the lowest -wage country is impeccable and we should live up to that. The costs of pollution are likely to be non-linear as the initial increments of pollution will probably be very low cost. I've always thought that under-populated countries in Afnca are vastly under-polluted; their air quality is probably vastly inefficiently low [sic] compared to Los Angeles or Mexico City. Only the lamentable facts that so much pollution is yenerated by non-tradeable industries (transport, electrical generation) and that unit transport costs of solid waste are so high prevent world-welfare-enhancing trade in pollution and waste. (3) The demand for clean environment for aesthetic and health reasons is likely to have very high incorne-elasticity. The concern over an agent that causes a one-in-a million change in the odds of prostate cancer is obviously going to be much higher in a country where people live to survive to get prostate cancer than in a country where under the monality is 200 per thousand. Also, much of the concern over industrial atrnospheric discharge is about visibility-irnpairing particulates. These discharges may have very little direct health impact. Clearly trade in goods that embody aesthetic pollution concerns could be welfare enhancing. While production is mobile the consumption of pretty air is a non-tradeable. The problem with the aguments against all of these proposals for more pollution in LDCs (intrinsic rights to certain yoods. moral rights. social concerns, lack of adequate markets. etc.) [is thai they] could be turned around and used more or less effectively against every proposal For liberalization (Surnmers quoted in The Economist Febmary 9. 1992. p. 66).
Thus, it is apparent that ai least some influential mainstream economists have begun to consider how the environmental degradation. which often results from capitalist production, can create barriers to continued production and coiisumption. However. the focus appears to be on how to externalize the costs of production to geographic regions where they will do the least damage to the global capitalist system and on how to find sustainable ways to exploit ecological capital. What appears to be of primary importance to these economists is the survival and well-being of the global capitalist systeni, as opposed to the survival and well-beiny of endangered eco-systems and the general human population.
Social ecology, as developed by the eco-anarchist Murray Bookchin, proposes that capitalist accumulation is not possible without inflicting harm upon both human and non- human communities. Bookchin maintains that the structure of the capitalist system forces individual capitalists to subordinate any concems they may have regarding environmental degradation and other social problems to their primary concern. which is increasing profits and expanding markets:
However ecologically concerned an entrepreneur may be, the harsh fact is that his or her very survival in the marketplace precludes a meaningful ecological orientation. To engage in ecoloyically sound practices places a morally concerned entrepreneur at a striking, and indeed, fatal disadvantage in a competitive reiationship with a rival-notably one who lacks any ecological concerns and thus produces at lower costs and reaps higher profits for further capital expansion (Bookchin 1993. p. 368).
Bookchin's arguments regarding the inabil ity of capitalists to i ntegrate social concerns into their decision-making processes is similar to some Mamist critiques of how the structure of capitalism robs both workers and capitalists of their free will:
. . . like the vulgar owner-entrepreneur of the bad old days. the modern manager, however bright and shiny. must also submit to the imperative demands inherent in the system of which he is both master and servant; and the first and most important such demand is that he make the "highest possible" profits. Whatever his motives and aims may be, they can only be fulfilled on the bais of his success in this regard. ..lndeed an economic elite dripping with soulfulness would not. in the nature of the system, know how to pursue a different purpose ...This is what, ultimately, their purpose is for, and to it must be subordinated all other considerations including public welfare (Miliband 1969, p. 34).
While Bookchin does provide arguments reyarding why capitalists exploit humans and extemal nature, unlike O'Connor he does not theorize what the relationship is between these two forms of exploitation. A theory which explains how these two phenornena are related is necessary for understanding why timber extraction in B.C. has iricrraserl while employment in the forest industry has hcrrased and why social movements as different as the labour movement and the environmental movement have advocated similar reterms to address social problems like unemployment and environmental degradation. According to Bookchin, a sustainable economy presupposes the abolition of a//
social hierarchies, especially the dualistic thinking that separates humans from the rest of
nature and leads humans to believe that extemal nature can be dominated. Bookchin
maintains that social hierarchies are not an essential component of human societies.
Hierarchies began to evolve when older members of extended families or clans began to
daim special privileges for themselves. As the division of labour between the sexes became
more specialized and technoloyical changes li ke the replacement of horticulture with agriculture occurred. the social and economic roles of women were marginalized and
patriarchies emerged Later on. hierarchies based on control of the means of production emerged and created divisions like slave and slave owner. landowner and serf. capitalist and worker. Bookchin maintains that social hierarchies which justify and perpetuate the exploitation and oppression of other humans led to the belief that human dominance over nature was both justifiable and possible.
The belief that humans can exploit nature with no regard for how their actions affect the ability of eco-systems to reproduce themselves is a dangerous and self-defeating world view. Such belief systems have been held partially responsible for the demise of the Soviet
Union (Ahlander, 1994; Bauman, 1992) and the Roman Empire (Hughes, 1997) and have led to either the complete or virtual destruction of eco-systems which have sustained human populations for thousands of years (e.g., the fisheries on both Canada's east and West coasts and the buffalo commons). Other hierarchies like the division of mental and manual labour or valuing men over women, justify and perpetuate the oppression of the majority of the
human race. The abolition of the above hierarchies would likely decrease both social inequality and environmental degradation. However. in regard to Bookchin's theory. Joel
Kovel (Kovel 1997. p. 23). has argued that some hierarchies, e.g.. the hierarchy ihat exists between parent and child. or the hierarchies which exist durin3 a surgical operation, are necessary in order for any society to function. Thus. the abolition of dlsocial hierarchies would likely have adverse social consequences.
Bookchin favours local control over resources and econom ic planning over centralized planning. Both socialist ecologists (O'Connor, 199 1 C ) and deep ecologists
(Naess. 1997) have expressed reservations regarding local autonomy. O' Connor maintains that many environmental problems like acid rain or the greenhouse effect are global environmental problems that cannot be rffectively addressed at the local level. Indeed. many environmental problerns that rnanifest thernselves ai the local level are caused by activities in distant locations. Coal burnt in the U.S. rnid-west causes acid rain and the destruction of
Forests and lakes in the Adirondack Mountains. Pulp miIl effluents dumped into the Fraser
River causes fisheries located hundreds of miles downstream to be contaminated with carcinogenic agents.
Although Arne Naess has advocated local political autonomy for decades. he has recently argued that centralism is often necessary to prevent local govemrnents from destroying local eco-systems:
Again and again central authorities must coerce ioca; communities. Whereas ideologically, I'm al1 for local cornmunities and against centrai authority, it is clear now that we have to have it. Like we have some parts of Alaska where central regulation is needed to protect free nature. This is a terrible thing, but nevertheless, central authority is necessary (Naess 1997 pp. 78-79). 30
A centralized state, whose authority supersedes the autonomy of local governments, has the potential to create situations in which individuals at the local ievrl have to abide by policies made by persons who do not live within the socially constructed borders of their comrnunities. This creates the danger of giving decision makins power to individuals who are not directly affected by the consequences of their decisions. Conversely. giving local communities absolute control over both humans and the non-human species that exist within their borders. has the potential to create a tyranny of the global minority Under such conditions, a local communitv has the power to determine if the last remnants of n rare species will rxist. if local human minorities will receivr equal protection under the law. or if local production will be stmctured in a way that externalizes the costs ont0 other communities. Clearly. both centralized and local control of land and labour have many potential dangers. In many cases, a combination of local and centralized control is probably the best option. As will be discussed in later chapters, advocates of locally controlled comrnunity forests in B.C. (e.y., M'Gonigle and Parfitt. 1994), stress the importance of reyuiations established at the provincial level which would be designed to prevent local cornmunities from over-exploiting forests.
There are several variations of eco-feminist thouyht. Liberal eco-feminists focus on how male domination excludes women from research and decision making processes regarding nature and society. They also recognize that unfettered capitalism results in environmental degradation. However, they contend that capitalism's tendency to destroy extemal nature can be controlled through scientific research, technology, and legislation.
Women should be allowed full and equal participation in these arenas. This approach to 3 1
ecological problems retains the liberal belief that each individual seekins to maximize his or
her own self-interest, when held in check by appropriate technology and government
reyulations, benefits society in geeneral. Liberal eco-feniinism provides a critique of capital's
exploitation of external nature and the exclusion of women from fully panicipating in the
male dominated fields of science, business, and politics. but it does not provide a critique of
capital's exploitation of labour nor does it question the power differences and hurnan
immiseration that result from capitalist modes of production (Mrrchant 1992, pp. 188-90)
Cultural eco-feminists (e.y.,Mies and Shiva. 1993) assen that wornen. particularlv
Third World wornen. are more aware of the interdependent relationships that organisms havc
witli one another and with the "connectedness of rverything." Converselv. these theorists
contend that most men are obsessed with war and conquering both women and nature.
Moreover, there is a direct relationship between the conquest of nature and the oppression of
women (Mies and Shiva, 1993, p. 15). In shon, cultural eco-feminists daim that a tendency
io act in harmony with external nature is an essentiai aspect of women's biological makeup and the tendency to destroy external nature and oppress women is an essential component of
men's biological makeup. This ahistorical analysis of human nature has been criticized for
ignoring how culture and socialization affect relations between humans and between humilns
and external nature. Such thinking "implies that what men do to the planet is bad; what
women do to the planet is good" and "makes it ditiicult to admit that men can also develop
an ethic of caring for nature'' (Merchant 1992, pp. 193-4). David Pepper maintains that if
the essentialist arguments of cultural eco-feminists are correct, then creating a sustainable,
egalitarian society is impossible, as "it follows logically from such arguments that humans 32 are powerless to rid themselves of patriarchy; however much they changed their society it would reappear" (Pepper 1996, p. 108).
Socialist eco-feminists (e.g.. Mellor, 1992) reject essentialist arguments regarding human nature. They rnaintain that both nature and human nature are socially constructed.
'l'herefore. it is possible to constnict an ecological ly sustainable, egali tarian societv Li ke eco-social ists. socialist eco-feminists em phasize the importance of material interchanges wi th nature and the forces and relations of production, in shaping social relations and human consciousness. However. they maintain that the forces and relations of rqwo~iitcrio,ralso play signitlcant roles in shaping social relations. hurnan consciousness, and the life chances of individuals. Moreover. they rnaintain that simply replacing the capitalist mode of production with a socialist mode of production will not necessarily address social problems such as patriarchy and the unsustainable exploitation of external nature (Mellor. 1992).
Maria Dalla Costa (Dalla Costa. 1996) has exarnined how the creation of wage labour placed a double burden on women. Not only are women forced to sel1 their labour on the open market; they are primary caretakers of children. Hence. women perform both wage labour and the non-wage labour of producing and reproducing the labour force. "Particularly from a womarr '.Y viewpoint, capitalist development has always been unsustainable because it places her in an ic~wrstai~tabablecontradictiorr. by being an unwaged worker in a wage economy and hence , for that reason, denied the right to an autonomous existence" (Dalla
Costa 1996, pp. 1 16- 1 17).
Like Dalla Costa, Mary Mellor maintains that in patriarchal societies nurturing children is a chore often imposed on women regardless of their desire to take on the role of 33 motherhood and that , "In doing this work, women produce a substantial proportion of the rnaterial basis of men's lives. but perhaps more importantly yive men that most precious asset, time" (Mellor 1992, p. 54) The unequal division of child care labour creaies a different consciousness among wornen. In contrast to the experiences of individuals who perfonn labour in the public sphere, which stresses personal gain and cornpetition. wonien who perform the labour of nurturing children focus iheir attention on establishing deep emotional bonds and meetin3 the immediate needs of others. Mellor maintains that the experience of "motherinp" children has the potential to expose both men and wornen to cultural values (e.g., altruisrn. nurturing) which can be utilized in the creation of a socialist eco-feminist socieiy which addresses the oppression of women and the destruction of extemal nature as well as the exploitation of wage labour in the public sphere. Mellor is careful to emphasize that the personality traits of nurturing and altruism are not an essential part of wornen's genetic make-up:
This is not to retum to an essentialist idealization of "wornen as mothers." Not al1 women are mothen or want to be. Not a11 mothers enjoy that role. Mothering is a role that can be carried out by men and women. The potentialiy positive values of mothering attach to the performance of the task, not the biology of the performer (Mellor 1992, p. 53).
Socialist ecofeminists cal1 attention to issues which have either been ignored or neslected by both mainstream Marxists and eco-socialists. They have brought attention to how the social relations of reproduction result in the "super-exploitation" of women.
Moreover, they have called into question the assumption that the demise of capitalism and the emergence of socialism in itself is sufficient to end gender inequality and environmental degradation.
Like O'Connor, Clause Offe (Offe. 1975) maintains that the capitalist state plays a very active role in making the conditions of capitalist production, i.e.. raw materials, labour. and infrastnicture, available to capital Offe maintains that the capitalist state has four elernents: exclusion, maintenance, dependency, and legitirnation. Exclusion refers to the separation of the public sphere of govemment and the private sphere of capitalist accumulation. Under most circumstances. the state is excluded from demanding that private businesses produce comrnodities and it is also excluded (under most circurnstances) from preventin~businesses from engaging in any capitalist venture which proves to be pro fitable.
Although the state is forbidden from directly controlling capitalist accumulation. it has both the authority and the responsibility to take what ever measures are necessary to ensure that sufficient qualities and quantities of the conditions of capitalist accumulation are available to private businesses. Thus. the capitalist state is held responsible for the maintenance of the capitalist system. According to Offe, the state maintains the capitalist system by either allocating resources already owned by the state to capitalists or by produciny production conditions that are not profitable for the private sector to produce. In the case of B.C. 's forest industry, the provincial government allocates resources which i t already owns, mainly access to Crown forests. to timber capitalists. The state also produces production conditions for timber capitalists. For instance, skilled labour is produced at the public's expense via public schoois and universities.
Implicit within O'Connor's theory is the assumption that the capitalist state is incapable of saving capi ta1 from destroy ing its production conditions. Offe' s proposition regarding the state's dependence upon capitalist accumulation, provides an explanation regarding why the state is unlikely to iake any actions which would substantially reduce capitalist accumulation. The state directly depends on continued capitalist accumulation for its own resources. "ln the absence of capitalist accumulation, everything, includiny the power of the state tends to disintegrate" (Offe 1975, p. 176). The capitalist state's dependence upon capitalist accumulation appiies to al1 political parties once they are in power, including quasi-socialist parties such as the New Democratic Party (NDP). In the case of B.C., a reduction in the annual allowable cut allotted to timber capitalists or environmental and/or labour regdations which reduce the short-term profitability of corporations. would also result in a reduction in the short-term tinancial resources of the state.
However, in liberal democracies, the state cannoi appear to be acting solely on the behalf of timber capitalists. Therefore:
Legitimation. or the need for lei&timacy, adds an imponantj)i,iirrhelement to the concept of the capitalist state. The idea is that only if (and only as long as) the capitalist state manages, through a variety of institutional mechanisms. to convey the image of an organization of power that pursues common and peneral interests of society as a whole. allows access to power and is responsive to justified demands, the state can function in its specific relationship to capitalist accumulation... . .the rxistet~ceof a capitalist state presupposcs the systematic denial of its nature as a capiralist state (Offe 1975, p. 127).
As will be discussed in chapter four, both the provincial pvernment and timber capitalists have played very active roles in attempting to convince the public that the present structure of the timber industry is the optimal method of deriving the maximum social benefits from publicly owned forests.
The different approaches to explainhg the causes of environmental dqradation and/or the exploitation of labour and the relationship between capital and the state, briefly detailed above explore areas that are either ignored or have not been suff'ciently discussed by eco-socialist theorists. such as the intrinsic worth of non-hunians. the human relationship to external nature, the relationship between the oppression of women and the exploitation of external nature. and why some noncapitaiist economic systems also use external nature in unsustainable ways. Moreover. such theorists as Arne Naess and
Herman Daly have constructed critiques of capitalist culture. that are germane to some of the issues raised in this work. Since O'Connor's theory does not include a critique of capitalist culture and how these values e.g., consumerism, can lead to environmental degradation, the works of Arne Naess and others will be discussed in later chapters. Having brietly discussed other relevant theoretical orientations. the focus will now turn to O'Connor's theory of the second contradiction of capitalism and why it is best suited for Our purposes.
Marxism and Ecology
Manists have traditionally focused on capital's exploitation of workers and how contradictions inherent to the capitalist mode production create the conditions necessary for capitalism's demise and the transition to socialism. However, Marx and Engels were well aware of the crucial role that extemal nature plays in capitalist production. Marx stated that three production conditions are necessary for capital accumulation: labour, or the personal conditions of production; nature, or the material conditions of production (Mm18751 1978, p. 53 1 ), and the general communal conditions of production or infrastructure. The "material conditions of production are in the hands of non-workers in the form of property in capital and landW(Marxl875/ 1978, p. 53 1 ) The working class owns nothing except its labour, which it must seIl to those who own the material conditions of production
The distribution of production conditions is a central aspect of Marxist theory. The class that owns the material conditions of production has the power to appropriate the surplus value that is produced by the working class. Moreover, the capitalist class has the power to deny the working class access to nature, which. in turn. gives the capitalist class the power of life and death over the working class. Xlthough capitalist accumulation is impossible without labour, labour itsclf is useless unless the worker has access to nature and the means of production. In the "Critique of the Gotha Plan" Man wrote:
Labour is not the source of al1 wealth. iVmm is just as much the source of use values (and it is surely of such that material wealth consists!) as labour, which itself is only the manifestation of a force of nature. human labour power... . . And in so far as man from the beginning behaves towards nature, the prirnary source of ali instruments and subjects of labour, as an owner. treats her as belonging to him. his labour becomes the source of use values. therefore also of wealth. The bourgeois have very good grounds for falseiy ascribine sicprn~u~ifrnlcreoriw potver to labour; since precisely tiom the tàct that labour depends on nature it follows that the man who possesses no other property than his labour must, in all conditions of society and culture. be the slave of other men who have made themselves the owners of the material conditions of labour [nature]. He can work only with their permission, hence live only with their permission (Marx I8W 1978. pp. 525-526).
.I\lthough Marx clearl y understood that capitalist accumulation was impossible without nature, and the control of the material conditions of production is a central pan of his theory, he did not theorize how capitalism could create economic crises and self-destnict b y destroying its production conditions. Moreover, the socialists who followed Marx appear to have taken an abundance of natural resources for granted. Socialism both in theory and in 3 8 practice has tended to focus on maximizing per capita consumption and deveioping the forces of production with the intention of exploiting natural resources to the maximum possible extent. Tom Bottomore has indentified several factors which have led socialist
States and socialist activists to focus on economic growth: the ernersence of socialism in underdeveloped nations and the poverty that existed in many capitalist countries, (especially during the 1930s). Moreover. during post-World War II era. the rapid expansion of capitalist economies. led socialists to believe that there was a need to compete with capitalists both in the production of consumer goods and in the arms race (Bottomore 1990, p. 4 j.
In the nineteenth century, there were only a billion people on the entire planet. Per capita consumption of natural resources was low relative to late twentieth century First
World standards, and the means of exploiting nature were relatively primitive. In the era of drift nets, feller bunchen. chernical fertilizers, a rapidly expanding global population. and an increasing rate of per capita consumption, it has become rnuch more apparent that in many cases. the material conditions of production are being exploited at a rate which exceeds their ability to reproduce themselves. Recently, Manist scholan have begun to examine how capitalist production adversely affects the environments of non-humans and humans. especially the poor and the working classes (e.p.. Foster, 1994; Pepper, 1995; Raskin and
Bernow, 199 1 ; Sweezy and Magdoff, 1989). These theorists contend that both Manist thought and ecolopical thought are deficient. The former addresses capital's exploitation of labour while ignoriny capital's exploitation of nature, whereas. the latter does just the opposite. This relationship has been summarized as follows:
In practice, both the "red" and "green" perspectives have been incomplete. On the one hand, Mmism has held an overly benign view of human intervention in nature, in which the environment is seen as, in effect, limitless and elastic, and where human technofogical ingenuity can overcome apparent environmental limits to growth. At the same tirne, ecological problems and constraints have not been incorporated into Mmist theories of accumulation, capitalist crises, the global economy, and underdeveloprnent.
On the other hand, environmentalism has lacked the profound philosophical and historical foundation of Mamism. It tends to ignore national and international relations of economic control and political power, and their implications for economic development and the fate of the environment. It views nature too abstractly and with too little connection to the social processes acting within it. Finally, it disregards class and socioeconornic contexts in focussing on the preservation of the environment (Raskin and Bernow 1991. p. 89).
In B.C.,the theoretical dichotomv between class issues and environmental issues has cenainly been a factor in creating the popular perception that there is an inherent contlict between the interests of environmentalists and the interests of forest sector workers. Through numerous articles and political cartoons, the popular press has reduced the debate over the use of forested land and labour to a choice between forests and forest sector jobs. This perceived conflict between workers and environmentalists has led to confrontations between environmental activists and workers ( e.g., Vancouver Sun June 20, 1997 p. 1 ; The Provincg
June 15, 1 997 p. A 10). As will be discussed in chapter four, public relations firms working on behalf of timber corporations, have capitalized on the perceived dichotorny bctween class issues and environmental issues by attempting to present timber corporations and workers as allies in a war ayainst environmentalists. In shon, the separation of environmental issues from workiny class issues has been a major factor in enablinp a united timber capitalist class to pit the two social movements which most actively challenge capital's access to labour anaor nature against one another. A theory that offers an explanation of the relationship between the rapid decline of forest sector jobs and the increase in timber extraction and theorizes how it is possible for the interests of woodworkers and environrnentalists to intersect. can make a siynificant contribution to moving beyond the jobs versus environment dichotomy. O'Connor has provided such a theory, whereas. none of the al ternative perspectives discussed above make any propositions regarding the relations hip between the exploitation of land and labour.
O'Connor rind the Two Paths to Socialism
O'Connor's work has included at least some mention of how environmental degradation can create barriers to capitalist accumulation for decades In the rarly 1970s. his . . work The Fiscal Crisis of the Sm (O'Connor. 1974) focused on the interdependent relationship between monopoly capital and the liberal state. The growth of monopoly capitalism leads to unemployment, poverty, economic recessions and the like. In order for monopoly capitalisrn to be profitable. it is necessary for the state to make investments in inf'astnicture, education, and social wel fare prosrammes. Thus, the yrowth of monopo IV capitalism requires the growth of the state sector and the socialization of production costs, via state expenditures. While more and more of the costs of production are being socialized. private appropriation of profits continues, which. in tum, tends to create a fiscal crisis for liberal States. O'Connor included the costs of environmental degradation in his analysis. . . However, in ïhe Crwot the St& environmentai degradation is only discussed in a brief appendix. It was not until the 1980s that the barriers to accumulation created by capital's destruction of extemal nature became a major focus of his work.
In his essay, "Capitalism, Nature, Socialism: A Theoretical Introduction" (O'Connor, 1988), O'Connor retains the traditional Marxist view that the contradiction between capitalist forces of production and capitalist relations of production create contradictions that can lead to the transition to socialism. However. it is also proposed that capital's tendency to destroy its conditions of production (i-e.,labour, nature. and urban infrastructure) creates a second contradiction which may also create possibilities for the transition to socialism.
O'Connor derives his definition of production conditions from the works of Karl
Polanyi and Karl Man. O'Connor maintains that capitalist production depends on three categories of production conditions: nature. infrastructure. and laborpower (O'Connor.
1991). A production condition is anything that is not capitalistically produced, but is used by capitalists in the production of cornrnodities. For instance, loggers, millworkers. forests. water. and air are not capitalistically produced. but the production of wood products presupposes that they are available in sufficient quantities and qualities. Among production conditions, labour is unique in that it is capable on its own of resisting capitalist exploitation. whereas, "extemal nature has no subjectivity of its own" and must rely on social activists to defend it from capitalist exploitation (O'Connor 1988, p. 8). Production conditions are cornponents of capitalist forces of production. However, the term forces of production not only refers to the production conditions involved in the production process, it also refers to the manner in which production conditions are exploited during this process.
Thus, as discussed below, it is possible to have a contradiction between the forces of production and production relations when production conditions are exploited in a rnanner which impedes their ability to reproduce themselves.
In order for capitalism to reproduce itself, production conditions must also reproduce 43 themselves. However, since production conditions are not capitalistically produced, their reproduction cannot be completely controlled by capitalists. Local residents can rebel against the construction of infrastructure which threatens their health and/or quality of life.
Environmental activists can challenge capital's access to air, water. and other raw materials.
Workers have the ability to withhold their labour. Moreover. women have the ability to consciously refuse to engage in the non-wage labour of producing and reproducing the work- force (Dalla Costa, 1996). In short. the fact that production conditions are not capitalisticallv reproduced creates the potential for many different segments of the population to resist capital ist exploitation.
The liberal state regulates capital's access to production conditions and frequently participates in manipulating the qualities of production conditions to meet the needs of capital. For example, the state may attempt to prevent capital from over-exploiting a production condition, as is the case with laws governing capital's access to fisheries or limiting the amount of timber that cm be extracted in a yiven year. The state manipulates the quality of production conditions to rneet the needs of capital in numerous ways, e.g., education policies, building roads, ferry systems, railways, and by repairing the damage that capital has done to its production conditions through rehabilitating salmon habitat. etc ln liberal democracies, the state's involvement in regulating capital's access to production conditions and the state's attempts to make production conditions available to capitalists
"politicizes" i.e., transforms control over capitalist production from the private sphere of the economy to the public sphere of the state.
Therefore, the staie is frequently the site at which various interest groups compete to determine if capital will have access to certain production conditions. or what form capitalist exploitation of production conditions will take. Thus. the extent to which environmental degradation and the exploitation of human labour exist, is a function of the ability of capital to influence state policy despite opposition from competing interest groups.
The First Contradiction of Capitalism
O'Connor states that his description of the first contradiction of capitalism is a:
deliberate "Srnithian" simplification of the traditionally defined economic contradiction of capitalism which altogether neglects Man's critique of Smith...... l put the contradiction of capitalism in its sirnplest terms with the two-fold aim of (a) preparing a discussion of crisis induced restructuring of the productive forces and production relations and (b) setting up a standard bv which we cnn compare the "traditional" with the "non-traditionai" or "second" contradiction of capitalism based on the process of cüpitalist-created scarcities of external and human nature (O'Connor 1988. p. 19).
The first contradiction of capitalism results from the contradiction between capitalist forces of production and capitalist relations of production. Capitalist forces of production refers to the labour power. machinery, and other materials utilized in the production of commodities. Production is a social process engaged in by those who seIl their labour to the capitalist class. The relations of production refers to the ownership and control of the means of production and the division of labour in the workplace. Although production is a social process, the surplus value produced by workers during the production process is appropriated by those who own the means of production. The first contradiction occurs when capitalists attempt to restore or maintain profits by increasing the rate of exploitation of workers, which, in mm, results in a decreased effective demand for consumer goods. Lack of effective demand is inherent to the capitalist mode of production as, "Everything else being 44 the same, any given amount of surplus value produced and/or any given rate of exploitation will have the effect of creating a particular shonfall of commodity demand ai market prices"
(O'Connor 1988, p. 5). In this case, what increases the short-term profits of the individual capitalist is detrimentai to the capitalist system as a whole. The first contradiction of capitalisrn manifests itself in the form of capitalist overprodlrctb~~.where there is a problem tinding markets for capitalistically produced soods.
Capitalkt overproduction results in an economic crisis. In order to survive the economic crisis, capital often restructures productive forces and/or production relations with the aim of restoring profits. "Changes in either typically presuppose or require new forms of direct and indirect cooperation within and between individual capitals and/or within the state and/or between capital and the state" (O'Connor. 1988). For instance. in an attempt to restore profits, productive forces may be restructured through cooperation among capitals. who agree to share technoloyy that makes more efficient use of production conditions, thereby reducing production costs. Restructuring of production relations usually involves more cooperation between capitals. between capitals and the state. and more state planning of the market. Increased state intervention in the market has taken many forms e.g. fascism.
American New Dealism, and democratic sociôlisrn.
Jurgen Habermas (Habermas, 1975) contends that increased state planning produces a
"legitimation crisis" for both capital and the state. Existing relations of production, which may have been accepted by the bulk of the population for yenerations, are suddenly called into question:
At every level, administrative planning produces unintended unsettling and publicizing effects. These effects weaken the justification potential of traditions that have been tlushed out of their nature-like course of development. Once their unquestionable character ha been destroyed, the stabilization of validity claims can succeed only through discourse. The stirring up of cultural affairs that are taken for granted thus funhers the politicization of areas of life previously assigned to the private sphere (Habermas 1975. p. 72).
Like Habermas, O'Connor also contends that state intervention in the economy
produces a legitimation crisis for capital. When the state becomes more involved in
regulating and planning capitalist production. the perception that capitalism is a "natural."
ahistorical social formation is undermined. which. in turn. increases the possibiiities of conceiving of alternatives to private ownership and control of the rneans of production.
Thus. the crises that result from the capitalist mode of production. create the possibilitv for a transition to socialism. However:
Nothing can be said a priori about "socialist imminence" except at the highest level of abstraction. The key point is that capitalism tends to self-destruct or subven itself when it switches to more social forms of production relations and forces. The prernise of this argument is that tey giiwri srr ofcupit~iiisr trchriologk.~,work rr htiotis W. is comisrerir ivith nrom hiri o11e sri of prociictiori re1atii11i.s teid thcii ti~ygivm .set ofproûtîctiori rekttiwa is co~rsister~twith more thari o~e.set Ojft>chmIugie.s, c IC. The "fit" b etween relations and forces is thus assumed to be quite loose and flexible. In the crisis, there is a kind of two sided struygle to fit new productive forces into new production relations and vice versa in more social forms without. however, any "naniraï' tendency for capitalisrn to transform itself to socialism (O'Connor 1988, p. 23).
More social forms of production relations are compatible with many different political systems including fascism. O'Connor contends that existiny political structures,
ideologies. national traditions and the degree of popular mobilization, are prirnary factors that determine whether or not more social forms of productive forces and production relations result in a transition to socialisrn.
The Second Contradiction of Capitalism
"The point of depamire of "ecological Marxism" is the contradiction between capitalist production relations and productive forces and conditions of production"
(O'Connor 1988. p. 7). The second contradiction stems from capital's tendency to damase or destroy its own conditions of production. Capitalisrn destroys its conditions of production by externalizing the costs of production on to labour. nature. or the communal conditions of production. Le., urban infrastructure. For instance. capital impairs the abilitv of nature to reproduce itself by exploiting it in ways that result in shon-term profits and long-term environmental degradation. The tendency of capitalism to destroy its own conditions of production resuks in capitalkt ri~r The causes of the second contradiction of capitalism are both econornic and social. They are economic in the sense that the destruction of production conditions creates absolute. physical shonages of production conditions. For instance, in B.C., due to over togginp, commercially viable timber is located funher from mills and is therefore more costly to extract. Furthemore, by extemalizing the costs of production on to nature, the timber industry has increased the costs of production for other capitals like the fishing industry The destruction of production conditions in tum often mobilizes groups who either demand that the state suspend capital's access to production conditions or seek to restructure capitaiist exploitation of production conditions. These yroups often have the unintended effect of raising the costs of production (O'Connor, 199 1). In short, capital creates its own extemal barriers to 47 production in the form of absolute. physical shortages of production conditions and the emergence of social movements which seek to deny capital's access to production conditions and/or demand that the form of capital's exploitation of production conditions be altered. Both social and economic barriers to capitalist accumulation necessitate more state involvement in the planning and production process in order to save capital from destroying its production conditions and to make production conditions more cheaply available to capital. However. the state is forced to balance the demands of capital with the demands of other interest groups. The state and its relationship to capital may be questioned as well as the structure and legitimacv of the state bureaucrac? itself The end result is that the state plays a greater role in capitalist production. "More cooperation has the effect of making production conditions (already politicized) more transparently political. thereby subverting further the apparent "naturalness" of capital existence. The telos of the crisis is thus to create the possibiiity of imagining more clearly a transition to socialism" (O'Connor 1988. p. 10). As stated above, increased state regulation of the market does not necessarily result in a transition to socialism. Although the transition to socialism is not inevitable, O'Connor sees potential for the social movements that challenge capital's exploitation of production conditions to transfomi the liberal democratic state into a t~lydemocratic institution. The agents of transition to socialism are the working class and al1 the other social movements which challenge capital's exploitation of production conditions. Many contemporary social movements have as part of their political agendas the goal of ending capital's cornmodification of production conditions andior challenge specific foms of capitalist exploitation of production conditions. Environmental movements challenge 48 capital's commodification of nature and/or challenge specific forms of capitalist exploitation like clear-cutting or the use of drift nets. Urban movements challenge capital's use of urban infrastructure and space when they demand more low income housing etc Feniinist movernents focus on issues "which penain to (among other things) the definition of laborpower, the politics of the body, the distribution of child care labor in the home, and similar issues pertaining to the "personal conditions of production" (O'Connor. 1992). .Although the above social movements al1 challenge capital's exploitation of one or more production conditions. they also have cultural and political diniensions that cannot br reduced to politicai econornic categories. For instance, defending nature from capitalist exploitation is only pan of the political agenda t'or deep ecologists. They also seek to replace the dominant Western world view of a dualism between humans and external nature, with a non-anthropocentric world view. The state regulates capital's access to production conditions. Therefore. social movements which challenge capital's exploitation of production conditions usually deal with state apncies. Social movements that attempi to effect change throuph the state osually have similar experiences and complaints: "the state is unresponsive, oppressive, and too bureaucratie; relies too much on experts. conceals vital statistics; lies; and cannot get anything done" (O'Connor, 1992, p. 4). O'Connor contends that al! social movements which demand that the state restructure capital's exploitation of production conditions or that the state deny capital access to certain production conditions have the same goal: to make the state more responsive. For many social movements, this is an implicit, not an explicit goal. Hence, many contemporary social 49 movements have the common goals of challenging capitalist commoditication of production conditions (and/or specific fornis of capitalkt exploitation) and the explicit or iinplicit goal of democrntizing the undemocratic liberal stale O'Connor maintains that theorists and political activists should strive to make social movements aware that they have the corninon goal of drmocratizing the state. Funherrnore. a radical democratic political moveiiient requires Mamists and other pol tical activists co abandon strcct. dogrnatic adherence to their traditional political doctrcncs a wiliin-'mess tc.i lisien to one another and a willingness to espand iheir political agendas The purpose 1s not to reî'orm the liberal state but to replace it with n tnily democratic svsteni "The only political form that miylit work. that might bc eminentlv suited to botli ecoloyical problerns of site specificity and global issues. is a democratic state-a statr in which the administration of the division of social labor is democratically orssnized" (O'Connor. 199 1 ) O' Connor also includes international agencies. like the International Monetnrv Fund. in his definition of the stnte. He does not provide many deails regarding whnt form an international democratic state would take. In surnmary, O'Connor describes two contradictions inherent to capitalism which create the possibilitv for a transition to socialism. Both the first and second contradictions of capitalism lead to more state intervention in the market and more ovenly social forms of production. More overtly social forms of production in turn. make it more possible to conceive of alternatives to private ownership and aaininistration of the production process. Therefore, "it is conceivable that wc: arc engnping in a long process in which their occurs différent yet parallel patlis to socialism. Iiençe that Marx was not so much wrong as hc was 50 half right. It may be that the traditional process of "socialist construction" is giviny way to a new process of "social ist reconstruction", or the reconstruction of the relationship between human beings and production conditions including the social environment" (0' Connor 1988. p. 11). Criticisms of O'Connor's Theory Silice O'Connor detailed the propositions of his theory in the iate 1980s. several critiques of his work have emerged. Three of the most salient critiques, Le., Recio ( 1996). Ravaioli ( 1993). and Rosewarne ( 1997) wi Il be detailed below. Recio maintains that O'Connor's theory needs to be expanded to account for how various noncapitalist rconornic svstems destroy their production conditions. Raviloi has assened that O'Connor's proposition, "the more capital exploits labour the more it exploits labour and vice versa". is not true in al1 cases. Rosewarne argues that the manner in which O'Connor conceptualizes the labour movement and the new social movements responding to crises induced by the second contradiction of capitalism tends to deny the agency of mors involved in social movements. Moreover, Rosewarne asserts that O'Connor's theory does not take into account how social constnictions of "nature" affect perceptions of what constitutes an "ecological crisis" and in turn affects the structure and actions of social movements. Alben Recio (1996) contends that O'Connor's mode! is "incomplete" in that it fails to theorize how economic systems. other than capitalisrn, have destroyed their conditions of production. "Those, like myself. who believe that the capitalist system must be replaced by another type of social organization. are not going to gain credibility if we only try to explain how the capitalist system affects the conditions of production. In this sense, there is a need 5 1 for a broader theoretical framework that deals with these problems, and with the kind of society that would overcome them" (Recio 1996, p. 36). O'Connor does not discuss how other economic systems like the Soviet version of socialism. or pre-capitalist societies like the Roman Empire destroyed their conditions of production. As O'Connor himself has stated, "In some quarters. C'qitcd as a text is regarded as similar to Hitler's hlri~ikimipj: a statement of intent by the evil founder of one of the two great. horrible totalitarian movements of the 20th crntury" (O'Connor 1994, p. 3) If eco-manists rire gains to gain widespread credibility. it will be necessary to theorize why the Soviet Union and other authoritarian collectivisms '. as well as some pre- capitalist societies. tended to destrov production conditions. A theory that can explain whv the Soviet Union's forests were decimated by poorly fed and sheltered forced labourers (Ahlander, 1995) or why the Romans destroyed torests and agricultural land (Hughes 1997. pp. 12 1 - 1 Z),would help to articulate the differences between authoritarian collectivisms (and other economic systems that exploit land and labour) and the son of society envisioned by O'Connor. As John Bellamy Foster has observed. the first contradiction of capitalism describes a tendency for wealth to become concentrated into the hands of the few at the expense of the rnany. The second contradiction "can be expressed as a tendency toward the amassing of wealth at one pole and the accumulation of the conditions of resource-depletion, pollution, 'Authoritarian collectivism is a term used by Michael Harrington ( 1989, p. 61) to describe societies like the former Soviet Union, in which the means of production are publicly owned but they are controlled by an elite class of state bureaucrats. species and habitat destruction, urban congestion, overpopulation, and a deteriorating sociological life-environment (in short. deyraded "conditions of production") at the other" (Foster, 1992). The phenornena described by Foster likely exist in al1 societies in which an elite class is able to enrich itself at the expense of other classes. In the former Soviet Union and in pre-capitalist societies like the Roman Empire. the ruiing classes were able to externalize the costs of pursuiny their aspirations on to the exploited classes and external nature. An important distinction between authoritarian collectivisms and the eco-socialist society envisioned by O'Connor is that the use of production conditions would be democratically controlled. Therefore. political and economic decisions would not be made by a class of people who are able to externalize the negative consequences of their decisions on to other humans. However, a socialist society in which the means of production were both socially owned and democraticaily controlled would not necessarily create a sustainable and just social order. As some eco-feminists have rnaintained (e.3.. Mellor, 1997). there is no reason to assume that radical changes in the social relations of production would lead to radical changes in the social relations of reproduction and other areas of inequality between the sexes. Moreover, even a socialist democracy which included al1 humans would exclude other parties which could be potentially affected by the human material interchanges with nature. i.e., both future human generations and non-human species, from panicipation in the decision making process. Obviously, there is no practical way for non-human species or persons who do not yet exist, to directly panicipate in the democratic process. Therefore. in addition to public ownership and democratic control of the means of production. a fundamental change in both world view and basic values would be necessary to prevent present yenerations from extemalizing the costs of their standard of living on to future generations and non-human species. Specifically, as has been argued by others (e.p., Da1 y 1994; Durning 1992; Naess. 1989). world views such as anthropocentrisrn and values like consumerisrn and liberal individualism tend to result in environmental degradation. Unfortunately. we cannot look to present day cultures or economic systems for models of sustainable lifestvles. "Today. there are few or no communities. societies. or cultures which show clear long-range sustainability. which I define as long-ranse ecological sustainabilitv combined with a satisfactory life quality" (Naess 1990. pp. 95-96). However. there are cultures. which at least during certain epochs of their histories. were ecoloyically sustainable. Prior to European contact. the nations of the lroquois Confederacy, which were both matriarchal and matrilineal. led ecologically sustainable lifestyles which did not endanger the well-being of non-human species. Their ability to live sustainable lifestyles was not solely due to their relativelv low population levels. The Iroquois consciously avoided over-exploiting external nature Women, who collectiveiy owned the agricultural land. practised environmentally sustainab le agricultural techniques (Holly, 1 994). The Iroquois also established hunting seasons and other regulations desiyned to allow game species to successfull y reproduce themselves (Morsan 1 85 1 / 190 1 ). In contrat to the Western anthropocentric view of extemal nature, the Iroquois did not consider intelligence and volition to be strictly human traits. "The savage man conceived the diverse bodies collectively constituting his environment to possess inherently mystic potence. and to be living, thinking, willing, passionful beings who lived, thought, willed, became angry or 54 pleased, like himself under like conditions" (Hewitt 1902, p. 671). Moreover, both men and wornen participated in the Iroquois' democratic system of government (Holly, 1994). The case of the Iroquois confederacy does not prove that present generations are capable of making the transition to a sustainable economy and an egalitarian social order. However. it does demonstrate that anthropocentrism. parriarchy. private ownership of the means of production, and environmental degadation are not essential components of al1 human societies. O'Connor assens that "the more capital exploits labor. the more it exploits nature and vice versa" (O'Connor 199 1. p. 9 Carla Ravaioli ( 1996) maintains tliat. the exploitation of labour and nature "do not proceed at the same pace. at least not in a directly proportional sense. as we would infer from O'Connor's passages. On the contrary, we can have a mounting ecological crisis while accumulation is in good health, which is exactly what happened in the last two centuries in the Western industrialized world" (Ravaioli 1996. p. 59). She acknowledges that the improved standard of living was, for the most pan. limited to the West and that only certain segments of these societies increased their levels of consumption during this period. Moreover, she concrdes that capital is currently faced with the problems which stem from both the first and second contradictions of capitalism. It cannot be denied that during certain periods in history, capital's exploitation of nature has proceeded at an accelerated Pace whereas, during this same time frame, the working class has been able to gain significant concessions from the capitalist class. Beginning with the end of the Second World War up until the early 1970s, in North Amerka, wages and consumption levels increased drarnatically arnong cenain segments of 55 the workiny class (Philips, 199 1). During this same period, environmental degradation increased at an unprecedented rate (Foster. 1994). In O'Connor's theory, the ability of capital to exploit labour is partially dependent on capital's political power relative to labour. As noted above, external nature cannot defend itself from human exploitation; therefore, capital's ability to exploit rxtesiial nature is dependent on capitai's poiiticai porver relative to environmentalists and other interest groups who challenge capital's exploitation of the natural conditions of production. In the post-World War II era up until the approximately the early 1970s. labour was more organized and politically powerful than at any other time in the twentieth century In contrast. the structure and political power of the environmental rnovement during this period prevented the environmental movement frorn mountins a significant challenye to capital's exploitation of nature. Up until the early 1980s. the environmental movement was dominated by organizations which were heavily reliant upon corporations for their funding. Such organizations, eg.,the Nature Conservancy, tend to emphasize preserving token amounts of pristine wilderness and the "wise use" of natural resources (Luke, 1995). Thes do not directly challenge capital's destruction of eco-systems and they accept the dominant notions regarding "progress" which will be discussed in chapter four. Toward the end of the 1970s, organizations such as Greenpeace and Earth First! began to emerge. These organizations relied on volunteers and received financial support from the general public. Unlike the more traditional corporate funded organizations, these new grassroots organizations were willing to directly challenge capital's destruction of individual species and eco-systems (Foster, 1994). Thus, during the post-World War II period of accelsrated economic growth and environmental degradation. capital vinually had a free hand in exploitiny nature. but labour was in a position to demand concessions from capital. O'Connor's proposition should be revised to indicate that. in regions or time periods when the political and economic power of labour is relatively strong and the environmental rnovement is relatively weak. capital's exploitation of the environment will be greater than capital's exploitation of labour, and vice versa. O'Connor maintains that by forcing social movements to confront the various forms of capitalist exploitation. capital itself creates the conditions for alliances among the various social movements. panicularly the labour movement and the environmental movement: Crisis-ridden and crisis-dependent capitalism has forced the traditional issues of socialism and the relatively new issues ("new" in the terms of public awareness) of ecology to the top of the political agenda. Capitalism itself turns out to be a kind of marriage broker between socialism and ecology, or. to be more cautious, if there is not yet a prospect for marriage, there are at least openings for an engagement (O'Connor 199 1, p. 6). Stuart Rosewarne contends that. "Such a teleology tends to rob the social forces of any initiative to cheat the working class and the new social movements of any active agency in effecting chanye and imposing barriers to accumulation" (Rosewarne 1997, p. 1 12). He further maintains that although capitalist exploitation threatens the weil-being of labour, urban space and the environment, alliances between the working classes and other social movements are not a given. Indeed, in the current struygle over land and labour in B.C.. workers and environrnentalists have at times engaged in open, and at tirnes violent, confrontations with one another. hlthough arguments can be made by academics and other professionals that the social movements which challenge the various forms of capitalist exploitation have common interests, these social movements will not work together unless rhqvprrcriw that there is sorne son of connection between the various forrns of capitalist exploitation. If alliances are to be formed between labour and the new social movements. there is clearl y a need for sucial activists who are active subjects. Alain Touraine (Touraine. 1988) has proposed that actors involved in social movements are not objects prodded into action by structural forces. they are active subjects that consciousl~attempt to shape the course of history Like a species which mutates to adapt to a changing physical environment. social rnovements mutate to adapt ro chanping social conditions. However, unlike bioloyical mutations. which occur at randorn. actors in social rnovements consciously assess their social environment and seek to rffect change. During the research phase of this project. it became apparent that social movements are capable of responding to the dual exploitation of labour and nature in a multitude of ways. Which. in turn. made a theory of an active subject necessary. Thus. Touraine's work has bren included in the chapters on Greenpeace and the Pulp. Paper, and Woodworkers of Canada. Social movements are not the only institutions which actively engage in the stnigyle to shape history . As will be arsued in chapter four, it is in the interest of both capital and the state to prevent major changes in provincial forest policy. O'Connor does not discuss the role that ideology plays in maintaining existing relations of production. Moreover, he does not discuss how both capital and the state utilize their considerable resources to reaffirm the dominant ideology with the aim of quashing significant social refoms. As will shown in chapter four, both capital and the state actively attempt to prevent major stnictural changes in 58 the forest industry by reaffIrminy the dominant ideology and by vigorously attackins groups and individuals who criticize the status quo. Rosewarne also criticizes O'Connor for ignoring the role that social constructions of nature and social constructions of ecoiogical crises play in shaping social movements. which in turn shape the form that barriers to capitalist accumulation take. Throughout his work. O'Connor uses the ternis "nature" and "ecological crises" wi thout providing a precise definition of these terms. The crisis that results from the second contradiction. "is premised on a fairly firm commitment to the natural as bounded by pliysical or biophysical barriers and limits" (Rosewarne 1997, p. 114). In O'Connor's theory. social movements do not actively construct perceptions of nature or what constitutes an ecological crisis, they merelv respond to capital's assault on production conditions. In contrasr, Rosewarne argues t hat social constructions of nature shape perceptions of what constitutes an ecological crisis, which in turn affects the goals of social movements. Rosewame uses three categories to describe how nature is socially constructed: Jrs~riotwe. fisr ~lcrtitrr(irr the srcorid .srrr.se). and srcwd mrrwr. First nature is that portion of the physical world that has not been altered by human actsvities. First nature in the second sense. is the understanding of how ecological systems and organisms function independently of human interactions. First nature in the second sense is constnicted by the science of ecology and other natural sciences. Once humans alter first nature, "and no species including ours can use nature without changing it" (Rosewame 1997, p. 1 15), it becomes second nature. Rosewame maintains that O'Connor's theory focuses on second nature and the tendency for capital to impair second nature's abil ity to reproduce itself. Rosewame stresses that al1 three concepts of nature are socially constnicted, includiny concepts regarding "first nature in the second sense" whicli are produced b y ecologists and other natural scientists. Recognizing that concepts of nature are sociallv constructed is important for two reasons. First. "What is essential is that we do not take as a given the ruminations of ecological scientists as the one and only word on the state of our place in nature. They have their own agendas shaping their work. and their ides often pet promoted simply to serve the interests of panicular social forces, by those already in a position to exercise influence in the production and marshailing of ideas" (Rosewarne 1997. p. 1 18). Second, theorizins how concepts of nature and ecological crises are socially constructed is crucial to understanding social movements "because ideas of nature reflect and shape the social practices and social movements that detemine Our human encounters with nature" (Rosewarne 1997, p. 1 17). Recognizing that human concepts of nature are socially constructed, including concepts yenerated by natural scientists, is usefuI for understanding the struggle over land use in B.C. Persons who make daims of having expen knowledge regarding forest ecology have used their scientific credentials to justify various uses of forested land. Scientists hired by Greenpeace and other environmental oqanizations have maintained that in order to protect biodiversity and to avoid exacerbating international environmental problems such as global warming, it is necessary to refrain from Iogging in certain areas of coastal temperate rainforests and interior old growth forests. The environmental movement conceives of oid growth forests, particularly coastal temperate rainforests, as rare and endangered eco- systems that are different in kind than second growth forests, which they contend primarily 60 contain flora and fauna which are not endangered and exist in relative abundance. Persons employed by timber corporations and who profess to have expert knowledge regarding forestry issues, such as Patrick Moore challenge the assertions made by Greenpeace and other organizations by challenyiny their daims to "expert" knowledp. For instance Moore has made the claim. "1 believe they [Greenpeace] have thrown tmth out of the window on this one. They simply seem unwilling to listen to the science on their whole forestry campaign" (Moore quoted in Rowell 1996. p. 182). Furthermore. the foresr campaigns in wtiich the various environmental organizations are engaged. are implicitv shaped by what these instituiions consider to be first nature. first nature in the second sense. and second nature. The campaigs also tend to have two main areas of concern: how much t'irst nature should be allowed to exist, ie., how much wilderness should be placed off- limits to commercial exploitation. and what are appropriate ways for capitalists to exploit second nature, e.g.. land that will be made accessible to logging and other forms of commercial exploitation. Rosewarne's work can be considered a compiement to O'Connor's theory. He acknowledges that capital's assault on production conditions has the potential to mobilize social movements from many different social sqments and that it is possible for the various social movements to form alliances. By attributing agency to the social actors. Rosewame has helped to shed light on why various individuals and orsanizations have responded so differently to the various forms of capitalist exploitation. The Forest lndustry in B.C. and the Second Contradiction Mter reviewing several different approaches to understanding the causes and 6 1 consequences of environmental degradation and/or the exploitation of labour, as well as the major critiques of O'Connor's theory. it is apparent that the theory does not address several issues which are germane to this study. As we have seen. there are many different approaches (Bookchin, 1993; Da1 y and Cobb, 1994; MacNeil, Winsemius and Yakushiji. 199 1 ; Melior, 1992; Mies and Shiva, 1993; Naess. 1972; Offe. 1975) to understanding the relations hi p between capi ta1 and the state and to undentanding the underl ying causes of environmental degradation and social inequality. Like social theorists. social activists (Rosewarne. 1997; Touraine. 1988) subjectively construct thrir perceptions of what constitutes "nature". what constitutes "environmental degradation". the value of non-human lik. and the causes of economic and ecological crises. This, in turn, affects how social üctors define social problems and the goals and strategies of social movements. Therefore. a major focus of this project will be to determine. through utilizing open ended interviews and other research techniques. how social actors construct their perceptions of ecological and econornic crises. The relationship between capital's exploitation of nature and capital's exploitation of labour is very germane to the issues explored here. Contrary to O'Connor. Ravaioli ( 1996) has agued that in some cases, there may be no clear relationship between these two variables. It will be argued in later chapters that in the case of B.C.,there is some support for O'Connor's proposition reparding the positive relationship between capital's exploitation of labour and nature. As discussed above (Recio, 1996), O'Connor's theory does not address the causes of environmental degradation and the exploitation of labour which occur in economic systems 62 other than capitalism. While this remains a very valid criticisrn of the theory of the second contradiction of capitalism. this issue will not be thoroughiy explored here as capitalist methods of exploiting forests and forest sector workers are primarily utilized in B.C. The main focus of this project is to investigaie how the labour movement and the environmental rnovement have responded to ccipitd '.Y dual exploitation of labour and nature. O'Connor's theory is appropriate for analysing the political economy of B.C.'sforest industry for several reasons. According to O'Connor, the state plays a central role in ensuring that there are sufficient qualities and quantities of land. labour. and infrastructure made available to capital. A theory which contains propositions regarding the role of the state in capitalist production is particularly germane to any discussion regarding the forest industry in B.C. This is so. because virtually al1 of the commercially viable timber is located on Crown land. The provincial pvernment gants cutting rights to corporations in exchange for stumpaye fees paid to the provincial government. Hence. the state plays a more active and transparent role in making forested land available to capital than in other regions like the U.S. Pacific Nonhwest. whrre corporations such as Weyerhauser own vast tracts of forested land. O'Connor's theory also has practical implications for the labour movement and the environmental rnovement in B.C. Since the state regulaies capital's access to production conditions, both the labour movement and the environmental movernent have an interest in challenging corporate domination of provincial forest policies. Moreover, the theory suggests that in order to be effective, the reforms demanded by the labour rnovement and the environmental movernent would have to be very similar. Capital restructures productive 63 forces with the intention of increasing profits b y lowering production costs. Restructuring of productive forces through technological changes, increased tlexibility, etc., "[has] the systematic effect of loweriny the costs of reproducing the work force; making raw materials available more cheaply or their utilization more efficient; reducing the period of production and/or circulation, etc." (O'Connor, 1988). The restructuring of productive forces often results in greater exploitation of both labour and nature. This is so, because "If we regard the rate of depletion and pollution of nature as dependent on the rate of accumulation and rate of profit, increases in the rate of labor esploitation will increase the profit and accumulation rates, and hence the rates of depletion and pollution" (O'Connor, 199 1. p 9) Thus, O'Connor maintains that reducing one form of exploitation presupposes reducing rhr othcr As will be discussed in chapter three, during the past two decades. timber capitalists have increased the exploitation of labour by increasing the organic composition of capital and through the introduction of "full tlexibility" management systems. During this same period, the rate at which old growth forest eco-systems are being destroyed has dramatically increased. Some labour activists and environmental activists are aware of the connection between these two phenornena. This, in turn. has resulted in both social movements designing policies which are intended to address both forms of capitalist exploitation. While the exploitation of labour and the exploitation of nature may not, in al1 cases, increase in a lockstep manner, the theory of the second contradiction of capitalisrn provides a useful fmework for understanding the relationship between environmental degradation and the declining levels of employment and living standards arnong forest sector worters in B.C. Furthermore, the theory provides an explanation of why certain actors involved with CBAPTER TRREE PRIVATE lNTERESTS AND PUBLIC FORESTS "Government actions ure selùum pdicated un full consultation with informerl e/ecturutes; they are more frequently influenceù by the pressures and stated clentunds of the must puwerful econumic ucturs... Once such ucturs are in in place, regiunnl empluyment is ~tîachetlto them; to uct cuntrav tu their interests is tu jeuparilize the securiîy u/cummunities and wurkers. " Puîricia Murchuk (1 983, p. 31). Having detaiied the theory of the second contradiction of capitalisrn, the theory. dong with some of the critiques of the theory which have been incorporated into my own perspective. will be used as a framework for analysing the political economy of BC's forest industry. The aim of this chapter is to determine to what degree does the political- economy and ecology of B.C.'s forest industry support the propositions made by O'Connor. Three of his propositions will be examined in this chapter: (1) One of the primary roles of the state is making production conditions available to capital. (2) The more capital exploits nature the more it exploits labour (the reverse is also tnie). (3) Capital creates self-imposed barriers to accumulation by exploitiny production conditions. The deyree to which the case of B.C.'s forest industry supports these propositions will be detailed below. Other propositions made by O'Connor, Le., how capital's dual exploitation of labour and nature affects social movements, will be discussed in later chapters. Role of the State Throughout the twentieth century, timber capitalists have increased the exploitation of all three production conditions. As capital's needs regarding the quantity and quality of production conditions has changed, the state has responded by retraining the labour force, 66 making more timber available, and by increasing expenditures on infrastructure. The state has always played a very active role in making publicly owned timber available to capital. In the case of corporate access to timber, the state has enabled capital to extract timber at a cost which does not retlect the market value of the timber much less the actual short-term and long-term cost of destroying old growth forest eco-systems. Moreover, the state has clearly subordinated the long-term interests of the public to the short-term interests of capital by allowing timber capitalists to exploit the forests at a greater rate than they can reproduce t hemselves. Unlike other regions. such as Sweden and the Southeastern U.S.. timber capitalists do not extract tiniber which was producrd as a result of private and/or siatt: invrstrnents. The vast majority of timber that is currently extracted. or has ever been extracted in B.C., cornes from old growth forests. In contrast to the US. where a substantial amount of the forested land is owned by corporations and private individuals. ninety-five percent of the commercially viable forested land in B.C. is located on Crown (public) land. Prior to the Forest Act of 19 12, companies were given access to Crown lands free of charge (Ministry of Forests, 1997). Since this time, timber capitalists have paid stumpage fees to the state in return for access to Crown lands. Relative to stumpage fees paid by companies operatiny in the U.S. Pacific Nonhwest, where stumpage fees are determined bv cornpetitive bidding, stumpap fees paid by companies operating in B.C. have historically been substantially lower (Hammond 1992, p. 182; Marchak 1983, pp. 67-71; Marchak 1995 Pp. 87-89; M'Goniyle and Pdtt 1994, p. 79). Although labour costs are higher in B.C.than the U.S., the cost of timber is less expensive. The end result is that overall production costs are cheaper in B.C. than in the Pacific Nonhwest (Marchak 1983. pp. 72-73). Multi-nationals have taken advantage of B.C. 's low stumpage rates by extracting timber in B.C. and havins value added to it in labour intensive rnills in the U.S. In the early 1990s. there were approximately forty mills in Oregon and Washington which relied almost iotally on timber exponed from B.C. (M'Gonigle and Parfitt 1994, Pp. 39-4 1 ). Recently, the long standing arrangement between timber capitalists and the province regai-ding stumpage fees has been disrupted. The Coalition for Fair Impons. a U.S. corporate lobby. argued that B.C. and other Canadian provinces were providing unfair subsidies to timber corporations bv charging aniîïciallv low sturnpage prices (The Globe and Mail April 19. 19%. p. B 4; The Province April 3. 1996, p. A 25). This resulted in the 1996 Canada- U.S. Softwood Lurnber Agreement in which British Columbia, Ontario. Quebec, and Alberta are allowed to export 14.7billion board feet of timber to the U.S. duty free. Once this quota has been exceeded. the provinces are required to ievy an expon tax ayainst the companies. There is a $50.00 U.S. currency tax (collected by the provincial gvernments) per thousand board feet on the fint 650 million board feet exceeding the duty free quota. Once the 650 million board feet limit has been exceeded, there is a $100.00 tax imposed for every thousand board feet exponed to the U.S. In return for this agreement, which is effective hpril 1, 1996 through March 3 1, 2001, the U.S. timber industry ayreed not to take any funher legal actions to limit Canadian lumber exports (http://www. dbtrade.com/lumber/surnmary. htm). Although industry groups like the Truck Logger's Association (The Vacouver SUR January 13, 1998, p. D 1) and the Coast Forest and Lumber Association (Wouver Su August 14, 1997, p. D 1) have maintained that these added costs have made timber corporations operating in B.C. less "corn petitive". they have not produced any evidence which would indicate that the costs of doing business are higher in B.C. than in the US. Pacitic Northwest. Due to pressure from industry. the provincial government is currentlv exploring ways to lower stumpage fees without provoking a trade war with the U.S. NAFTA The North American Free Trade Agreement (NXFTA), which came into effect January. 1994. at least for the time being. appears to have had little impact on either free trade in lurnber between the US. and Canada or on the domestic environmental regulations of these two countries. In one of the few esceptions made regarding free trade under NAFTA, Canada was exempted from any obligation to export raw logs (Marchak. 1998) In regard to increasing free trade amon3 panicipatinp nations, the above mentioned Soft Wood Lurnber Agreement. which was designed to limit the trade in certain soods. was implemented ofrrr NAFTA was signed. The U.S. and Canada have different regulations regarding logging practices on public and private land. The U.S. Endanyered Species Act enables individuals and organizations to sue federal government agencies for failure to adequately protect species which have been declared "endangered", regardless if these species reside on public or private land. B.C. does not have the equivalent of the U.S. Endanpered Species Act. Reyulations for logging on publicly owned land are generally considered stricter in major timber producing States like Oregon and Washington than in B.C., despite daims by the provincial government that after the Forest Practices Code, B.C. had developed "world class" logging standards. However, 69 B.C. laws governing logging practices on private land are more strict than the laws regarding logging on private land in the Pacific Northwest. Since there are significant privately owned tracts of forested land which are logged in the US. and relatively few areas of privately owned forests in B.C., directly comparing the Jogging practices between the two regions is problematic (Hobrrg, 1997). The changes which have occurred in the U.S. and Canada, e.g.the B.C. Forest Practices Code and the Clinton Spotted Owl Logging Plan occurred independently of the NAFTA. Moreover. N.4FTA in itself is unlikely to result in higher degrees of environrnental protection on either side of the border as it does not contain any provisions which encourage participating nations to raise the level of environmental protection to match more stringent regdations in other nations nor does it allow participating nations to refuse the impon of goods on the grounds that the manner in which they are produced threatens panicular eco- systems and/or the global environment. Although the NAFT.4 mentions environmental concerns on numerous occasions. it was intended to result in a higher deyree of trade and investment among the participating nations, it was not intended to increase the degree of environrnental protection in participaiing nations (Marchak. 1998). Concentration uf Cuîting Rights The manner in which the state has allocated cutting rights on Crown (public) land primarily benefits a small number of large corporations at the expense of small businesses and job creation. Furthemore, timber capitalists have had few obligations imposed on them to regenerate the public resources they have exploited. The structure of the tenure system has provided a few large corporations, that primwily manufacture wood products which create 70 relatively few jobs per unit of fibre ( Le.. pulp, woodchips, and softwood lumber for export). with secure, long-term access to timber. Since the 1950s. smaller. value added manufacturers, which create more jobs per unit of tirnber. have been forced out of business. One reason for the demise of smaller businesses has been the provincial government's and the IWA's (Industrial Wood and Allied Workers of Canada)' long standing preferencr for large corporations as they were thought to provide both greater job security and better worker safety than smaller lo-ging and mil1 ing operations (Marchak 1983. pp 60-6 1 ). New. value added businesses have di filcul tv expanding production and obtaining loans dut: to a lack of a reliable supply of timber (M'Gonigle and Parfitt 1994. pp. 84-86; Marchali 1995. p 89).Currently. over eiyhty percent of the allowable annual cut (AAC) is reserved for timber corporations which have either been issued Forest Licences (FL) or Tree Farm Licences (TFL) (Marchak. Aycock, and Herbert. 1999). The former is issued for a fifteen year term and is renewable every five years. The latter is issued for a twenty-the year term and is renewable every five years (Ministry of Forests, 1997). TFLs and FLs ensure that a handful of large tirnber corporations wil l have guaranteed access to the bulk of Crown timber for many years to corne, Throughout most of this century, companies were not required to replant areas that had been clearcut. They argued that the forests would naturally regenerate themselves. The provincial govemment was not in a position to reforest public land as the stumpage fees were IWA Canada used to be affiliated with the international union, International Woodworkers of America. It severed ties with the international union in 1987 and is currently known as Industrial Wood and Allied Workers of Canada. 7 1 too low to finance reforestation programmes (Marchak 1983, p. 355). By the early 1980s, this resulted in approximately 3.4 million hectares of Crown land being classified by the Ministry of Forests as 'hot satisfactorily restocked" (NSR) (Marchak 1995. p. 90). It was not until 1987 that timber companies were required to plant trees in areas which they had logged. Even under existing mies, corporations are only required to tend to trees they have planted until they have reached a stage in which they are "free to grow". They are not required to engage in silvicultural practices. like thinning or pruning the trees that would increase both the quantity and quality of future tirnber yields (M'Gonigle and Parfitt 1994. p. 6 1: hfinistrv of Forests 1997). According to UBC Dean of Forestry Clark Binkley, "BC's use of silvicultural technology lags behind that of vinually every country with which it cornpetes" (Binkley 1997, p. 45). Moreover. the state's failure to implement and enforce sustainable logging practices results in soi1 degradation which in turn leads to an estimated $80 million annual loss in forest productivity (M'Gonigle and Parfitt 1994, p. 73). Both timber capital ists and the state are apparently quite wi l ling to externalize the costs of production ont0 future generations. The MC As mentioned above, the state has allowed timber capitalists to extract timber at an unsustainable rate. Capitalist exploitation of the forest can be conceived of in at least two ways: its destruction of first nature, or old growth forest eco-systems, and its exploitation of first nature in a manner which does not allow second nature io reproduce the ecological diversity and economic values of the original forests. Under the B.C.Forest Act, the allowable annual cut (AAC) is detennined by the provincial chief forester. The Forest Act 3oives the chief forester a geai deal of latitude in determinin': the AAC. The Forest Act States that the chief forester must co~widersuch factors as the anticipated time required to regenerate the timber that will be extracted from a given area (Ministry of Forests. Forest Act 1979). The Forest Act does not even require the chief forester to consider how the allowable annual cut wi Il affect various environmental problems such as declining biodiversity, global warming. etc. Moreover. section eight of the Forest Act does require the chief forester to consider the "economic and social objectives of the pvernment. as expressed by the minister." Essentially. the wording of the Forest Act gives the state the latitude to set the AAC as high as it sees fit In the short-term, it is in the interest of the state to have an A.AC which is nrither econorn icall y nor ecologically sustainab le over the long-term. Governments are supposed to assume responsibility for the stewardship of natural resources in the public interest. At the same time. however, they are rewarded for investments in social infrastructure. not for long-term supports to nature. Indeed, the way the tenure system has been strucnired. governments obtain sturnpage fees (resource rents) when the forests are cut, not when they are conserved. Funhermore. resource rents have undenvritten many social and other services that the British Columbia population has enjoyed. And, because the exploitation of forests provides employrnent, govemments have put employment oppomnities ahead of long- term conservation. While this allows pvernments to survive for four or more years, it destroys forests that have lasted for 400 or more years (Marchak, Aycock, and Herbert, 1999, p. 14). In the short-terni, unsustainable AACs are also in the interest of timber corporations. Many timber corporations have invested in highly mechanized pulpmills and sawmills which must process large volumes of timber in order to remain profitable. However, pulpmills and sawmills can process more wood fibre each year than cm be sustainably extracted from Crown foresis over the long-term (Marchak 1995, p. 98). Therefore. the process of each timber corporation acting in its own self-interest has created a barrier to long-term capitalist accumutation in B.C. The failure of the state to impose a sustainable AAC on capital or to require capital to restock resources that it has depleted (Le., engaging in intensive silvicultural practices). are examples of the failure of the liberal state to regulate capital in a manner which saves it from its own excesses. Politicians and political parties are generally unwilling to reduce their chances of being re-elected by takiny any actions that would result in short-term economic hardships for their constituents. even if these reforms would likely contribute to lonb- term economic and ecological stability. According to UBC Professor of Forestry Michael Feller: When they set the AAC, they [the Forest Service] have to consider the economic and social implications. Which of course is totally unrelated to what the forests can sustain biologically. So, unfortunately. the whole concept has now been cormpted, because of the current M)P policy of considering just jobs, jobs, jobs. They're given a higher priority than what the forest can reliably produce .... No sovernment that I've seen is really capable of coming to grips with the fact that they have to decrease the cut. because they al1 think it means a yreat loss in jobs, which politically is unacceptable to them. But, the problem is. if they don't cut jobs slowly now, if they don? cut the AAC slowly, there will be a certain level of cutting, and then there will be a major drop. So, instead of having a few jobs lost now, or a slight change in the AAC, they're going to have a very, very, major drop with a major loss of jobs. And obviousiy it's not going to happen in the current yovernment's life time (Michael Feller, author interview, November 10. 1997). In the 1970s the annual cut in B.C.surpassed fifty million cubic metres. In the late 1980s, the AAC was as high as 90.6 million cubic metres (Schneider 1989, p. 1 18). Since this time, the AAC has been gradually reduced to approximately 70.5 million cubic metres (Marchak, Aycock, and Herbert, 1999). According to the B.C. Ministry of Forests. there is about a 20 percent gap between the AAC and the LTHL (long-term harvesting level) (Marchak, Aycock. and Herbert. 1999). The long-term harvesting level is an estirnate of the level of timber extraction that can be maintained indefinitely in a given area. Thus, according to the B.C. Ministry of Forests, there is a substantial level of overcut or "tàlldown" between the current AAC and the LTHL. The government's estimate of the pap between the AAC and the LTHL is very conservative as it does not take into account forested areas which are currently being considered for desisnation as Protected Areas and the rffects that the Forest Practices Code will have on the arnount of available timber. Moreover, the LTHL is an rco~iomicestimate of the aniount of timber that can be sustainably extracted from Crown land, it is not an rco/o,yicd estimate of the amount of timber that can be extracted over the long-term without endangering the ability of individual species and old growth forest eco- systems to reproduce thernselves (Marchak. Aycock. and Herbert 1999) Although it is impossible to determine the exact AAC that would be economicallv sustainable over the long-term. it is generally acknowledged that the AAC has been above the sustainable level for over two decades (eg.Feller, author interview November 10, 1997; Hoberg, 1997; Marchak 1995 p. 9 1 ; Schneider 1989, p. 1 18). According to Associate Professor of Forest Resource Management and Political Science at üBC, George Hoberg: The fact is we don't really know what the long-term sustainable level is. Our current estimates are based on assumptions about future growth that are extremely uncertain. We have good evidence that the current assumptions underestimate growth raies, but we don't know by how much. The major questions for the province is whether future investments in silviculhire can increase yields sufficient to offset the predicted falldown and right now we just don't know. We do know that the govemment has been taking great risks with the province's future (The Vancouver Sw July 12, 1997, p. A 2 1 ). As mentioned above, govemment estimates of the long term harvest level (LTHL) do not consider capital's destruction of old growth forest eco-systems. Capital's destruction of first nature. i.e. the destruction original old growth forests, has many undesirable consequences, such as the current rapid decline andlor extinction of endangered plant and animal species, the survival of econornically viable tlsh stocks, decreased opponunities for eco-tourism and other businesses which rely on pristine wilderness, and global warming. Both coastal temperate rainforests and interior old ~rowthforests sustain plant and animal species that cannot survive elsewherr (Hammond 1902. pp 32-33) Old growth forests contain disease resistant variations of trees and other plant life which can be used to devalop medicines and combat the spread of plant diseases. Many of these plants are Iikely to be found only in the diverse gene pool of old growth forests (Suzuki 1997. pp. 132- 134). "Moreover it was revealed that the old growth forest stored more carbon per unit than any other terrestrial eco-system thus far measured. making it a significant factor in the stabilization of the world's climate in the face of global warming" (Foster 1993, p. 16). hccording to John Ryan, research director of Northwest Environment Watch, B.C. emits four times the global per capita average of greenhouse gases. While B.C.'s per capita consumption of fossil fuels is lower than or equal to Pacific Northwest states such as Washington, Oregon, and Idaho. its overall yreenhouse gas emissions are hiyher due to "huge areas of rain forest being convened to tree farms" (Ryan 1997, p. 53). Most of the logging in B.C.occurs in old growth foresü. Clearcutting, a timber extraction method in which al1 of the trees in a yiven area are cut, is used in over ninety percent of the areas 76 logged (Sierra Lesal Defence Fund 1996, p. 5). Clearcutting replaces old growth forests, i.e. fint nature, with second growth forests. i.e., second nature. The long range plan is to cut second growth timber stands as soon as the tibre is merchantable. Thus, second growth forests never acquire the characteristics of old growth forests. In addition to lacking the desirable ecological characteristics of old gowth forests. the t im ber extracted t'rom second growth forests has a lower market value than old growth timber (Hammond 1992, p. 73). The provincial governrnent's current plan to preserve biodiversity is to designate twelve percent of Crown lands off limits to resource extraction. The validity of the government's clainis that twelve percent of the land base is sufficient to protect the biodiversity of B.C1svarious eco-systems has been called into question by both scientists and social activists. For instance. Greenpeace released a repon published by a team of biologists they had commissioned to make recommendations regarding the amount of land which should be set aside in B.C. to protect bio-diversity. The repon concluded that. "The 12 percent target for land area protection is not sufficient to maintain viable populations of species in British Columbia .....The twelve percent target is a political construct that is not borne out by yood science. Even more disturbing is the fact that over 60 percent of what has been protected in BC since 1992 has been rock and ice" (Greenpeace Press Releases, Vancouver, British Columbia, Greenpeace Canada, lune 16, 1997). The report went on to recommend that forty-five percent of each representative eco-system be set aside until further conservation assessments could be completed. According to Michael Feller, the amount of land which is needed to be set aside to protect biological diversity varies greatly according to individual organisms and eco-systems. However, he is very critical of the provincial government's current goal of placing 12 percent of Crown lands off limits to resource extraction. There is not one single ecological study which has ever shown that twelve percent is the desired amount to be set aside to protect a certain eco-system. There is not one sociological study which has ever shown that the people of British Columbia are happy with twelve percent and do not want tifteen percent or twenty percent or two percent or whatever. So. it is entirely a political figure that was conjured up by. the previous. the Harcourt government. It is not based on any scientific or any social rationale. It is purely a political decision... . . there is absolutely no ecological justification for twelve percent. There are sorne eco-svstems where you may want to protect one hundred percent. to protect the eco-system. There are others where perhaps two percent might be appropriate. However. the point is. politicians and bureaucrats love simple things. One number fits all. The world of nature is not like that. One number certainly does not tit al1 ...... My own persona1 belief is that. if you really want to protect areas and populations. then you need much. much more than twelve percent. If you want to protect genetically viable populations of species. then it's got to be more than twelve percent. Panicularly the animals that have large habitat requirements. Grizzlies for exarnple, if you protect only twelve percent of the existing grizzly habitat, then 1 would Say that you're yoing to have massive loss of grizzlies (Michael Feller, author interview, Nov. 10. 1997). The state has also directly and indirectly provided timber capitalists with the necessary infrastnicture needed in the extraction and manufacturing phases of commodity production. Timber corporations are responsible for building and maintaining roads on the Crown lands from which they extract wood. The costs of road building and other costs pertaining to timber extraction. like the costs of transporting wood fibre to various miIl sites, are taken into account when the province designates the stumpage fees for a given area. Due to the high volume of loyging, the available timber is now located farther from mills and at higher altitudes. Tirnber capitalists have been able to externalize the increased costs of building infrastructure onto the public in the form of reduced stumpage fees. In the province's interior. stumpage fees are as low as twenty tive cents per cubic metre ( See appendix B). The manner in which stumpage fees are calculated has not given timber capitalists any incenrive to fuily utiiize the timber in a given area or to make investments in silvicultural projects that would regenerate the timber they have extracted. As mentioned above, for years the annual allowable cut has been above the sustainable level and poor forestry practices have resulted in massive top soi1 damage. Timber corporations can compromise the abilitv of a forest eco-system to reproduce itself, secure in the knowledge that they can move farther into the hinterland and that the increiised costs of production will be paid for by the public. Moreover, subsidizing the costs of traiisponation gives corporations incentives to transport minimally processed forest products outside of the region in which they were originally extracted rather than building value-added mills close to the site of timber extraction. Although most forms of Forest tenures have appurtenancy clauses which require the tenure holder to operate a mil1 in the region in which the timber is extracted, most of the mills produce products which create reiatively few jobs per unit of wood processed, i.e., pulp, cants (squared logs), and lumber. "As companies are able to deduct the costs of transportation from stumpage fees, pvernment po licies actually discourage local job creation" (Burda, Curran, Gale, and M'Goniyle 1997, p. 1 10). For instance, Ainsworth Lumber Company is the major tenure holder in the Lillooet Forest District. In corn pliance with the appurtenancy clause of its tenure agreement, Ainsworth operates a mil1 in the village of Lil looet. However, the on1y product manufactured in Ainsworth's Lillooet mil1 is plywood veneer. The veneer is then shipped to other mills located in other B.C. forest districts, Alberta. and the U.S. Ainsworth's Lillooet mil1 creates 0.49jobs per thousand cubic metres, which is far below the provincial average; the B.C. provincial average is in turn, far below the provinces of Quebec, Ontario and the U.S.Pacific Nonhwest (See appendix C). Prtductiun uf lubou,ur Although human labour is produced by the various forms of the contemporary Farnily, the state and timber capitalists collaborate to ensure that the qualities of the labour force meet capital's needs. While the state finances the bulk of formal education. it has also allowed capital to engage in the ideological indoctrination of students at the elementarv. secondary, and post-secoodary levels. Up until recently. linle formal education was required to gain employment in the bush or in the rnills. The state's role in making rank-and-file loyyers and millworkers available to capital was minimal. A person without a high school diploma could rnake a relatively high waye as a logger or as a millworker (Barnes and Hayter, 1997). Capital did not require rank-and-file workers to have advanced technical skills. Furthermore. workers who had higher levels of education did not have greater income levels or more employment stability than iheir counterpans with less education (Marchak 1983, p. 361). As mills have become more capital intensive and automated, workers with knowledge of cornputers and other advanced technologies are needed. Through Forest Renewal BC,the Provincial yovemment has provided over $64 million over the past several years to re-train forest workers (The Vancouver Sun January 13, 1998. p. D 1). This traininy will no doubt benefit individual workers, but it also functions to provide capital with a skilled workforce at the public's expense. 80 In recent years, timber corporations have takrn an active role, via public education. to shape the mincis of future forest sectors workers and the general public. The Council of Forest Industries, the Pulp and Paper Industrial Relations Bureau. and various other industry organizations developed the Forest Education Module (FOREM), a pro-industry curriculum which is distributed free of charge to local school districts (Hammond 1992, p. 189). In the Prince George School District. the corporate-financed, pseudo-grassroots public relations enterprise, Share BC cooperated with Canadian Wonien in Tirnber. an anti-environmenralist organization with links to Share BC (Rowell, 1996). to develop a classroom curriculum which is delivered to elementary school children bv representatives from these two organizations (BC Education News Febniaryih.larch 1997. p. 5). Share BC also sponsored an essay contest, which offered a $3,000.00 cash prize for the student who wrote the best rssay on "Why Clearcut Logging is Benetkial for BC" (Latter and Juanita. 1989) Ike Barber. Chairman, CEO, and President of Slocan Forest Products purchased and distributed 2,000 . . copies of the pro-industry book. The Work inrt Forests of British Columb ia to schools rhroughout B.C. Vancouver Sun journalist Stephen Hume commented that the distribution of this book represents the "intmsion into the classroom of a corporate public relations agenda" (The Vancouver lanuary 17, 1998, p. G 3). Capital's influence on education also exists at the post-secondary level. Private corporations, like MacMillan-Bloedel and Weyerhaeuser provide substantial amounts of research dollars to the University of British Columbia's School of Forestry. In 1996. industry contribuied over $1 million in research funds (approximately 10Y0 of its total research budget) to UBC's Forestry Department (Faculty of Forestry, 1996 Annual Report, p. 33) Herb Hammond has contended that the research money provided by timber corporations creates a pro-industry bias among the Faculty of Forestry. In the late 1980s, Robert Kennedy, who at the time was Dean of the Faculty of Forestry, commented: ...the Faculty must be circumspect about their involvement in controversial or emotional issues. The large inte-rated cornpanies are increasin-ly sponsoring or supporting Our Faculty's research. They can easily be alienated by the perception that the Faculty is promoting a subject which they deem is not in , their brst interest (Kennedy, quoted in Hammond 1 992. p. 188) Michael Feller. who is a member of the Faculty of Forestry at UBC maintains that Hammond overestimates the degree to which corporate research gants influence the resrarcli and public positions trken by the Faculty of Forestrv Feller contends that he and many other faculty members receive no research funding from timber corporations and that they are free to criticize corporate policies (Feller, author interview, November 10, 1997). Furthermore. Feller asserts that many faculty members and students who enter the enter the Forestry Department. already have political ideologies which are compatible with the ideology of timber corporations. Interviewer: "You, yourself tèel that you have complete latitude to research what you want and express your opinions freely without fear of alienating companies?" Feller: "Well, 1 do. But then again, obviously if 1 was to pt rnoney from company X, then 1 wouldn't feel free to criticize company X...... There are obviously people who do get a lot of money from, well there's not many people who get a lot of money from industry, the forest industry in BC is not really interested in spending money on semi-altruistic research...... lt's not really a big source of dollars around here... ..ldon't think it's a major issue.... A person might not speak out against a company because of their value system rather than some sort of Anancial thing hanging over their heads .....But then again, if you do speak out, it might not be a funding issue but you might not be able to do the work in a company's area. In other words, there's not dollars involved, but if a company has a tree farm license, and you want to do some research. and you criticize that company. then maybe that company will prevent you from doing that work... . A company that maintains the logging road. has the right to put a gate on that road. even if it is on Crown land." Interviewer: "So, at the one extreme. you have Hammond saying that there is quite a bit of corporate influence on the Department. You're not sayin9 that there isn't any influence. but you are disagreeing about the dwrof corporate in tluence?" Feller: "I would say yes. obviously there is some influence. 1 know people who have been influenced throuph some of the funding they have received. through persona1 friendships etc.. but 1 know other people who are totally uninfluenced. .And in terms of financial influence, it's relatively small. Sol I disagree to the estent to which that influence occurs. And 1 really think that there is one thing that people keep ignoring in al1 this debate. It's always assumed that it's some outside influence which is making a person act in a certain rvay. But. often it's the person's own value systems. Like. there are a lot of people in this faculty whose value systems are quite compatjble to the value systems of tirnber companies. So. those people are obviously not seing to speak out and criticize tiniber cornpanies because their value systems say there is no problern..." Interviewer: "I've noticed that wvorld view reflected in the opinions of the Ministry of Forestry staff. they seem to equate social welfare with corporate welfare. They really seem to have this idea that what's pod for the company is pood for the people in the long nin." Feller: "A lot of people who go into forestry have that value system ... . .lt's not necessarily some son of external influence on them, it's what they inherently believe." Interviewer: "So it [the Forest- profession] attracts people with fairiy conservative political views?" Feller: "Oh, definitely. I mean, 1 look at the students and the faculty today, the undergraduate students. and 1 see no differences. philosophically between a lot of the undergrads and a lot of the forest managers who have been out there for thirty years. There is no di tyerence philosophically . . .And of coune, they will be the foresters of the future." While it is probably correct that IiBC's Forestry Department attracts persons who are already sympathetic to the positions taken by the public relations branches of timber corporations, it is important to note that many of these students have been exposed to corporate propaganda since eleinentary school. In British Columbia, future loggers, millworkers, government, and industry foresters grow up in an environment where they are exposed to Macmillan-Bloedel television comrnercials which assure the public that IVliicMillan-Bloedel is. "Making the most of a renewable resource."' In school. thev mav learn about the industry from a curriculum designed and paid for by timber corporations. The forestry curriculum may even be taught by 3 representative Frorn corporate front goups like Share BC. Those who attend post-secondary education in forestry have their perceptions of the timber industry funher intluenced by a department which receives signiticant research gants from tirnber corporations. While the state has assumed the responsibility of providiny labour with most of its formal skills. capital has assumed the task of indoctrinating the future labour force via public education. Thus, the state has collaborated with capital in its attempts to produce a complacent labour force. rather than social actors who are capable of conceivinp of viable alternatives to an industry which is both economically and ecologically unsustainable. There is no question that corporate research dollars have some impact on the curriculum taught by, research engaged in, and the public positions taken by some of the ' On July 29, 1997, the CBC television programme. "The National" aired a CBC investigation which found that MacMillan-Bloedel and other timber corporations were processing only high grade timber and either buming or burying an estimated 100,000 truckloads of lower grade timber each year. Although critiques like this occasionally appear on television and in the mainstream press, they are no match for the massive volume of public relations material which is distributed by the timber industry. 84 faculty of UBC's Forestry Depanment. The only question which can be seriously debated is the degree of influence that corporations have over the department's research and teachiny curriculum. However, provincial Forest policy is not made by foresters or ül3C facultv mernbers, it is made by the state which must in turn justify its policies to the public or face a legitimation crisis. Thus. while tïnancing research remains an important tool for intluencing the public discourse on forestry issues. timber capitalists have spent millions of dollars over the past decade on a public relations campaign designed to gain popular support for the current structure and practices of the forest industry. The corporate financed public relations campaign will be the main topic of chapter four. As is consistent with O'Connor's theory regarding the role of the state in capitalist production. the provincial governrnent has clearly played a very active role in makins all three production conditions (labour. nature. and infrastructure) available to tim ber capitalists. Moreover. the state has allowed capital to exploit both land and labour in a manner in which the long term economic and ecological health of the province has been subordinated to the shon term soal of increased corporate profits. Relationship Between Capital's Exploitation of Labour and Capital's Exploitation of Nature In the period followiny World War II up until the 1970s. pulp. paper, and sawmills in B.C. primarily engaged in Fordist-Taylorist-style mass production. Mass quantities of pulp. construction grade lumber, and plywood were exponed to the U.S. and other markets. Value added sectors like furniture manufacturing were not developed because they could not offer profits as quickly nor as large as the profits which could be derived from exportinp raw logs, lurnber, or pulp (Marchak 1995, p. 343). By the end of the 1970s. mills and logging operations were increasingly utilizing new technology which dispiaced workers. Machine- which increases productivity and therefore enables capitalists to reduce the nurnber of people they employ lrads to the increased exploitation of the workers who remain. This is so brcause replaciny living labour (humans) with dead labour (machines) reduces the socially necessary labour-time, Le.. the tiine needed for the worker to produce the value needed to pay his or her wages. This in turn increases the ponion of the work-day which is allotted to surplus labour-time, Le.. the tirne spent creating surplus value which is appropriated by the capitalist class (Marx 1867/ 1984, pp. 204-23 1 ). -4s theorized by O'Connor, timber capi ta1 ists have been attem pting to maintain profits by increasing both the exploitation of forests and forest sector workers. Between 198 1 and 1992, 24,400 jobs in the forest industry were eliminated (M'Gonigle and Parfitt 1994, p. 22). Since this time, the industry has continued to eliminate thousands of jobs (eg Thg Vancouver Sur( November 27, 1997, p. h 1; The FinwI Pest January 24, 1998, p. 99). Although increased mechanization is likelv the primary cause of job loss, the introduction of "full tlexibility" management systems (Hayter and Barnes 1997, p. 72) in pulp and sawmills has also been identified as a significant factor which have contributed to job loss. "Full flexibility" management systems enable managers to assign workers to virtually any task, regardless of the tradesperson's area of specialization. Thus, the time required to complete maintenance work and other tasks is reduced, which reduces the portion of the work day spent on socially necessary labour. which in mm results in job loss. As will be discussed in later chapters, the Pulp. Paper, and Woodworkers of Canada and the Communications. 86 Ene~y,and Paper Workers Union engaged in one of the lonsest strikes in B.C.'s history in order to resist the implementation of full tlexibility management systems in pulp and paper mills. The unions were well aware of the consequences of full-flexibility management systems; in regard to New Zealand based Fletcher Challenge's attempts to introduce full- tlexibility management practices into its mills. one union official stated. "the Company is hell bent on eliminating jobs (The Georiria Straia September 1 1. 1997. p. 9). As will be discussed in chapter four. the tirnber industry has insinuated that the creation of parks has been a major factor in job loss The journalist Kim Goldberg maintains that of al1 the forest sector jobs tliat were eliminated between 198 1 and 199 1. "1 percent were sacritked to parks. the remaindrr to mechanization" (Goldberg article quoted in Rowell 1996, p. 194). Even the two percent figure may overestimate the number of jobs that have been lost due to park creation, since the "level of cut hasn't gone down. even as a result of park set asides" (M'Gonigle author interview, December 12. 1996). Capital's Self-lmposed Barriers to Accumulation The first contradiction of capitalism results from capital's tendency to destroy its own markets by over-exploitiny labour. Most of the forest products produced in B.C. are exponed. Therefore. timber corporations have been able to eliminate jobs without resulting in any immediate shonfall of demand for their products. As late as 1995, timber corporations operating in B.C. made record profits (Vancouver SuMarch 15, 1996, p. D 6). However, other industries in other nations are also downsizing their workforces and demanding that labour accept lower wages and decreased benefits. The U.S. economy, which has 87 traditionally been the major inarket for construction grade lumber from interior mills, has undergone changes which have undermined the purchasing power of middle and lower income families during the past twenty years. In the period following World War II up until the early 1970s. the U.S. median tàmily income virtually doubled (Bluestone, 1995). The increased wealth was distributed to al1 levels ot'society. includin~the poorest tifth of the population. The overall increase in income, coupled with the post-war babv boom population reaching its house buying years duriny the 1970s. produced a large market for BC's constniction yrade lumber. Currently. the US. niay appear to be an island of economic prosperity surrounded bv nation-states which are plagued bv recession and high levels of unemployment. However. while it is true that the salaries of corporate executives have been dramaticall~increasing, the wages eamed by everyone from the middle-class to the poor have been decreasing. The rnedian wage, when adjusted for inflation. is currently lower now than it was before the 199 1 recession (Reich, 1998). Although unemployment is not currently a major social problem in the U.S.,many workers are irtderrnrpfoyd. The bottom 40% of wage earners experienced significant decreases in earnings and net wealth between 1973 and 1993, whereas. the top 5% saw significant increases in both income and net wealth. The decline in manufacturing jobs. technological change, a decline in unionized workers. and the U.S. trade deficit have been identified as major causes of increased inequality in income and wealth. Middle and workiny class households have attempted to preserve their living standards through increasing household debt (Bluestone. 1995). Thus, individual capitals acting in their own self interest on both sides of the border 88 have increased the exploitation of workers. which in turn has led to a decreased demand for consumer goods. As discussed above, U.S. timber capitalists have responded to this crisis by lobbying the U.S. to impose impon restrictions on Canadian lumber expons. Ln the current economic situation niany American consurners face the dual problems of increasing debt and decreasing income. When the next recession hits the U,Seconomv. timber capitalists operating in Canada will likrly see reduced effective dernand for their products coupled with more agressive attempts from timber capitalists operating in the U.S. to decrease corn petit ion from foreign corn peti tors. The mills operating on B.C.'sCoast primarilv expon to Asian markets. In 1997 economic turmoil in lapan and other .-\sian economies caused a drop in demand for timber and other forest products hmB.C 's coastal rnills. which in turn resulted in more lavoffs and mil1 closures (The Globe and Mail lanuary 23. 1998 p. 84). The forest industry in B.C. is experiencing the effects of a global economy which is "choking on its own productive overcapacity- too many factories chasing too few consumers" (Greider 1997. p. 12). In the global auto industry, productive capacity has far exceeded effective demand. Older manufacturing regions like Detroit are faced with competition from Korea. Japan. and Germany. In the global forest industry, British Columbia is faced with new competition from regions which have cheaper labour and timber which is both faster growing and more easily accessible. In the Southem U.S., timber corporations have made large investments in radiata pine plantations which can grow commercially viable trees in approximately 12-30 years, or eucalyptus plantations in countries such as Chile, Spain, and Morocco are capable of producing pulp grade fibre in seven years (Marchak, 199 1 ). 89 By the late 1980s. it was apparent that global production capacity of pulp. paper, and newsprint had outstripped global dernand. However. new mills continued to be built based on the assumption that demand would equal or exceed production capacity. For instance, consurnption of paper products increased by twenty-the percent during the early 1980s arnong several Asian countries (Marchak 199 1. pp. 13- 14). With the recent economic crises faced by several of the "Asian tiger" nations. and the decreased buying power of middle and working class Americans. it seems possible that timber capitalists will be facing similar problerns to their counterparts in the auto industrv The causes of the second contradiction of capitalism are both economic and social. They are economic in the sense that the destruction of production conditions creates absolute. physical shortages of production conditions. For instance. in B.C.. due to over- logging, commercially viable timber is located fanher from mills and is therefore more costly to extract. Furthemore. by externaliziny the costs of production onto nature. the timber industry has increased the cosü of production for other capitals like agriculture and the fishing industry. The causes of the second contradiction of capitalism are social in the sense that the destruction of production conditions mobil ires groups who either demand that the state suspend capital's access to production conditions or seek to restmcture capitalist exploitation of production conditions. These yroups often have the unintended effect of raising the costs of production (O'Connor, 199 1 A). In short. capital creates its own extemal baniers to production in the form of absolute, physical shortages of production conditions and the emergence of social movements which seek to deny capital's access to production conditions andor demand that the form of capital's exploitation of production conditions be altered. The increased exploitation of labour that has occurred during these past two decades has undoubtedly exacerbated many social problems experienced by forest sector workers and their families; which, in turn. impairs the ability of families to reproduce the labour force. However, this exploitation has increased rather than decreased the size of the "reserve army" of unemployed forest sector employees. Thus, at least at this juncture. as an aggepate. global capitalism may have reduced the markets for forest products. but local exploitation of labour has not created a shonage of labour for tiniber capitalists to exploit. Capital's exploitation of forests has resulted in various interest groups. such as Natives. environmrntalists. and evrn some forest sector workers demanding that the state designate certain areas off limits to resource extraction. After a lengthv stmggle. a coalition between the Lynon Native band. Western Canada Wilderness Cornmittee, and other environmental groups eventuall y resul ted in lO7.000 hectares of the Stein Valley being designated as parkland in 1995 (The Vancouver Sun. November 22, 1995, p. A I ). Parks have also recently been created on South Moresby Island and other areas. However, it is important not to exaggerate the obstacles that the creation of parklands have created to capitalist accumulation. A study by Trevor Jones indicated that if the Stein Valley had been logged, it would not likely have been profitable, even with the f 14 million subsidy that timber corporations were seekiny from the provincial sovernment (Jones, 1983). Furthermore, a study commissioned by Greenpeace indicaies that over 60 percent of what has been protected in B.C. since 1992 has been rock and ice" (Greenpeace Press Releases. June 16, 1997). 9 1 Capital's destruction of old growth forests has created barriers to accumulation in ways not theorized by O'Connor. According to O'Connor, the first contradiction results in a lack of effective demand for capitalistically produced yoods. whereas the second contradiction results in barriers to creating surplus value. However. due to the campaigns led by various environmental groups. capital's destruction ot'old growth forests has destroyed some of its markets. Io 1995. due to Macmillan-Bloedel's practice of clearcutting Coastai Rainforests. the New York Times announced that it would not renew its contract to purchase newsprint from Macmillan-Bloedel (Rowell 1996. p. 208). In the spring of l9')8. Greenpeace launched a campaign in Britain ursing companies to find alternatives to buying wood from timber corporations operating in B.C. that clcarcut coastal rainforests. In the tirst week of its campaign. Greenpeace was able to convince three cornpanies to not purchase timber which was clearcut from B.C.'s rainforests (Vancouver Sun March 3. 1998, p. .4 I ). Although European companies oniy purchase about ten percent of B.C.'s forest products. campaigns like these may significantly reduce the demand for B.C.'sold growth timber. Alternative fibre sources are being cultivated on tree plantations throughout the world (Marchak, 1995). Businesses that utilize wood products may find that plantation grown trees are of sufficient quality to meet their needs, may be priced lower than 8.C. fibre, and enable the business to daim that the tree extracted for their products are "sustainably hawested." As will be discussed in yreater detail in chapter five, timber capitalisis are attempting to overcome the barriers to producins and realizing surplus value created by environmental campaigns, through engaging in a massive public relations campaign designed to assure foreign consumen and the general public in B.C. that there is no validity to the criticisms of environmental yroups. Capital's failure to make the necessary investments which would enable second gowth forests to reproduce the amount of fibre extracted from old growth forests has created a barrier to achieving profits by raising the costs of timber extraction. Most of the easily accessible timber on the Coast and in interior valley bottorns has already been logged. Even David Zirnhelt, the current BC hlinister of Forests has adrnitted. "We're paying the price for over-cutting and for haviny cut the easiest and the best in the past. of course loyging costs are going up. of course there is poing to be supply problerns" (CBC Radio Transcript. CBC Almanac, January 26. 1998). Like most of the public relations material from industry and the state, Zirnhelt qualifies his admission of over- rxploiting the forests by stating that this over exploitation occurred in the pst. As discussed above. over-cutting has continued into the present. In the short term. overcorning the barrier presented bv a lack of easily accessible timber has been relatively simple for timber capitalists to overcome. Since the provincial pvernment reduces stumpage fees for areas which are more costly to log, timber capitalists have been able to pass on the higher costs of extracting timber from remote areas onto the public. However, exploitiny first nature (old yrowth forests) at a rate which exceeds the ability of second nature (second growth forests) to reproduce itself, creates a barrier which cannot indefinitely be overcome by externalizing the costs of production ont0 the public or by engaying in public relations campaigns. The annual allowable cut will either be drastically reduced or gradually reduced. Either way, this will result in mil1 closures and downsizing of virtually al1 of the forest sector jobs related to timber extraction and rnanufacturing. h gradua1 or drastic decline in timber extraction from B.C. is not likely to cause a global shortage of forest products; nor is it likely to result in an insurmountable barrier to timber corporations who currently have investments in B.C. To be sure, some logging and trucking contractors and even some corporations will be iorced out of business and their assets wil t be acquired by other businesses. However, corporations are not constrained to any one geographical area. Many of the corporations operating in B.C. are foreign based multi- national~,e.g., Weyerhauser and Fletcher-Challenge. The "Canadian" corporation Macmillan-Blordel has invested in tree plantations in the US. South East (M'Gonigle and Parîïtt, 1994). Macktillan-Bloedel also owns prime agricultural land on Vancouver lsland. It has evicted farmers who leased the land for food production and has applied herbicides designed to kill food crops. Despite protests from farmers that only three percent of Vancouver Island is arable land and that agricultural creates more employment ihan tree farms, MB plans to plant poplar trees which are suitable for pulp production in a ten year period. MB has also invested in poplar plantations in Washington State (Parfh. 1997). Ainsworth and other B .Cbased companies are investing in oriented strandboard mills in Albena which process poplar and other boreal hardwoods (Canada's Future Forest Alliance, April 1997). The above barriers to capitalist accumulation will 1ikely result in increased assets and market shares for the corporations which are able to overcome these barriers. The people who will most advenely be affected by capital's unsustainable timber extraction practices and its destruction of forest eco-systems will be the numerous workers who will likely never 94 again find employment as a logger or a millworker in B.C. The global hurnan community and future generations will suffer the effects of B.C.'shigh rate of greenhouse gas emissions and destruction of rare eco-systems. Unlike hunians, the species which depend on various forest eco-systems for their survival will not have the options of retraining for a new vocation or retocriting. Throughout the twentieth century, one of the primary functions has been to müke forests, forest sector workers. and the necessary infrastructure available to timber capitalists in the necessary quantities and qualities. Throughout this chapter it has been reiterated that the long term economic and ecological welfare of the province has usually been subordinated to the goal of short-term corporate protit. Thus. although the state has oRen clearly acted in the short-term interest of timber capitalists it has not been successful in saving capital tioni irnpedinp the ability of its own production conditions to reproduce themselves. As discussed in chapter two, O'Connor's proposition regarding the relationship between capital's exploitation of labour and nature is not valid in al1 situations. However, it clearly can be applied to the exploitation of forests and Forest workers in B.C.. particularly since the 1970s. Timber capitalists have also created numerous barriers to accumulation. As wages continue to decline in First World nations, this will likely continue to create a global lack of effective demand for capitalistically produced goods (O'Connor. 1996). At the local level, while the over-exploitation of B.C.'sforests will almost cenainly lead to the demise of some corporations, the $lobai timber industry is already in the process of restructuring itself to overcome the barriers created by the destruction of old growth forest eco-systems. Local economies and eco-systems are much more endangered than corporations. The latter are 95 mobile and are often able to adapt to chansing ecological and economic conditions, whereas the former are tied to a geographic area and have often perished due to decisions made by the latter. How persons concerned about the long-term viability of local economies and eco- systems have responded to the dual exploitation of labour and nature will be the focus of later chapters. CHAPTER FOUR RESPONSES TO TEE LEGITIMATION CRiSlS BY CAPITAL AND THE STATE "MB, Ive are tuld, Lolrls the mwst advanceù knowletlges nnd empluys "stateuf the am " technc)lugies, left tu the company, le.furesfswill be renewed. if not improvedfir future generatiuns " (Bruce Wllems- Brau n 1 996- 9 7, p. 13). O' Connor speculates that the crises engendered b y capital's dual exploitation of labour and nature tend to create a legitimation crisis for both capital and the state. panicularly when the state must intercede in order to help capital weather a crisis or crises The legitimacy of long standing relationships between capital and the state, the legitimacy of "expert" knowledge of government officials. and even the legitimacy of capitalism itself mav all be "radically" questioned (O'Connor , 1988). As discussed in chapter two. O'Connor writes as though social movements respond to objectively perceived crises However. social constructions of nature, ecoiogical crises, and political-economy shape social movements. In the case of B.C..environmentalists. labour unions, timber capitalists. and the provincial govemment al1 compete to define the nature andor the existence of the present economic and ecological crises. Man (Marx. l8Wl988) contended that the ruling class in any societv has the most power to define social reality. In the case of B.C., both the labour movement and the environmental movement are confronted with the legitimacy afforded to "experts" employed by either capital or the state and the immense economic resources at the disposal of both of these institutions. Moreover, the discourse regarding the exploitation of land and labour in B.C. is already embedded within a dominant ideology which supports the existing arrangements between capital and the state. Any social movement or movements which seek 97 to implement radical changes in the manner in which both forests and forest sector workers are utilized, must subvert the dominant ideology. As will be discussed below, this is not an easy task as both capital and the state actively atternpt to reaffirm the dominant ideology as well as pit the various social movements which challenge capital's access to production conditions against one another. This cliaptri. bepiiis b y detailing the dominant ideology in which the discourse regarding the use of land and labour is embedded. The focus will then turn to how the state and timber capitalists have responded to the legitimation crisis created by the accelerated Pace at which land and labour have been exploited in B.C. since the 1970s. The Dominant ldeology For our purposes. an ideology will be defi ned as a set of beliefs regarding the manner in which social institutions should be oqanized. In any society with a cornplex division of labour and numerous conflicting and competing interests, there will also be corn peting ideologies. In Canada. liberalism is the cornerstone of the dominant ideology . In short, it is commonly believed that a capitalist or "free enterprise" system will result in general material prosperity and a high degree of individual freedom. The role of the state in the econorny should be minimal. While the state retains the right to tau and regulate private businesses, govemment interference regarding investrnent decisions, wages, etc., are generally considered to be an impediment to material prosperity and persona1 freedom. Conversely, economic systems in which the public, via the state, owns and controls the means of production, are thought to result in widespread poveny and a lack of individual liberty (Marchak 1 98 1, p. 47). 98 Pan of the liberal ideology is the belief in "progress." Progress is measured by both increased production and consumption. Each generation will be better off than the generation which proceeded it because it is producing and consuminy more. "Society is al ways progressing, always adjusting to new conditions. Its growth is 1 imi tless. i ts perfection a viable goal. The analogy is to a wheel turning over new territory and adding always to its conquest of distance" (Marchak 198 1, p. 12). In order t'or this "wheel" to continue to turn. it is often necessary IO disnipt and/or destroy eco-systems and indigenous cultures that depend on these eco-svstems. However. according to the dominant Western beliefs reyarding external nature and non-Western cultures, land which has not been exploited using modem technoloyy for private protit is in need of "cultivation" or "developrnent" hlthouyh an eco-system may be rich in bio-mass and biodivenity. it is of no value unless humans are able to increase their rnaterial wealth by exploiting it. Any aboriginal people who may occupy this land are "primitive" and would benefit from being "civilized" (Geddicks 1994, p. xi). Thus, although the capitalist exploitation of a given area may result in less biological and cultural diversity, the land has been "irnproved." Also deeply embedded in Western thought is the belief that the individual who increases their material wealth by "developing" wildemess areas, also benefits humankind in general. In his treatise which aimed "to shew, how Men might corne to have a property in several parts of that which God gave to Mankind in cornmon" (Locke quoted in Tully 1980. p. 99, Locke argued that the land which was being utilized by aboriginal peoples in the "nations of the Americas" was not being exploited to its full potential. This, in Nm, (according to Locke). resulted in a common labourer in England beins better clothed and fed than an aboriginal "King" in North America. Therefore. the individual wlio appropriated land from aboriginal people and exploited it for their personal material gain. was doing a service to humankind in general: . . . .. he who appropriates land to himself by his labour. does not lessen but increase the common stock of mankind. For the provisions serving to the suppon of human life, produced by one acre of inclosed and cultivated land. are (to speak much within compasse) ten times more. than those, which are yielded by an acre of Land, of an equal richnesse, lyeing in waste in common And therefor he, that incloses Land and has a greater plenty of the conveniencys of life rnay be tmly said. to givr ninetv acres to Mankind. For his labour now supplys him with provisions out of ien acres. which were the product of a hundred lying in common (Locke quoted in Macpherson 1962. pp. 3 1 1-2 11). In the present, corporations that increase the wealth of shareholders by exploiting resources held in common like air. water. and forested land. argue that they also benefit humankind in general by creating jobs, paying taxes, and producing consumer pods (Richardson, Sherman. and Gismondi, 1993). Scientists and other "experts" are entrusted with the task of studyins external nature and determininp how it can be best exploited for the benefit of humankind. Although aboriginal groups and other local residents of a given area, may have more detailed knowledge of the particular eco-system being studied, local knowledge and traditional knowledge are generally considered inferior to "expert" knowledge (Geddicks 1994. pp. 200-3; Gismondi and Sherman 1996). The rational methods of inquiry employed by scientists are thought to enable them to make judgements independent of ethnocentric beliefs or personal biases (Richardson, Gismondi, and Sherman 1993, p. 87). Although these scientific experts may be employed by corporations engaged in resource extraction, they allegedly privilege the public's welfare over private protits. The present structure of B.C.'sforest industry is consistent with the basic assumptions of the dominant ideology. While the public owns the land, private interests are entnisted with exploitiny the forests in a manner which retlects the best interest of the genrral public. Until recently. there was no significant criticism of the tenure svstem which resulted in cutting rights on Crown land being concentrated into the hands of a Few large corporations. The IWA. which is the largest union representing millworkers and loygrrs in B.C., has a long standing policy of supponing the government practice of granting rnost of the cutting rights to a few. large pulp and lumber exponing companies. as they were thought to provide more stable employment and safer work environrnents than smaller companies (Marchak 1983. pp. 60-6 1 ). Care of the forest resource has been rntrusted to experts employed by the state and industry MacMillan-Bloedel and other timber corporations portray themselves as the "custodians" of the forest. "MB, we are told, holds the most advanced knowledges and employs "state of the art" technologies; left to the Company. the forest wil l be renewed. if not improved for future generations" ( Wiilrms-Braun 1 996-97, p. 13). The lack of widespread criticism of industry practices durin3 the post-World War II era up until the 1970s. was not due to blind faith in the dominant ideology. Marchak contends that: Individuals are seldom in a position to examine the beliefs that are given to them by political leaders, the mass media, schools, churches, and their employen. and other agencies of socialization and propaganda. They haven' t the time nor the training to match statements against evidence and to consider alternatives. Thus, it is quite possible for a population to believe things which are manifestly untnie, and to believe things thac are demonstrably contrary to their own interests. On the other hand, there is a limit to such beliefs. There has to be some congruence between what people experience day in and day out, and the explanations that are given to them for such events (Marchak 198 1, p. 7). Uiitil perliaps the early 1980s. the direct experiences of many B.C. residents supponed the proposition that giving a few large corporations almost exclusive rights to log and mil1 timber t'rom Crown land was in the best interest of forest sector workers and the rest of B.C.'spopulation. During this period, pulp. paper. and sawmills in B.C. primarily rngaged in Fordist style niass production. Mass quantities of pulp. construction grade lurnber, and plywood were exponed to the US.and other markets. Blue collar workers received high wages and relatively stable ernployment Although periodic layoffs did occur. the Keynesian style welfare state ensured that temporary periods of unemployment would not have a dramatic effect on the worker's standard of living (Hayter and Barnes 1997. pp. 9- 2)Furthemore, the unsustainable loyging practices employed by timber capitalists were less apparent during this time. Although little was being done to regenerate forests after they had been logged, the amount of timber which was extracted each year duriny the 1960s and 1970s was less than half the amount that was being extracted annually by the iaie 1980s. Not al1 segments of the population benefitted equally from the high wages made available from exploitiny Crown land. Nor were al1 segments of the population willing to uncritically embrace industrial forestry practices. In nonhern areas like Mackenzie and Prince George, whole aboriginal communities were evicted from traditional hunting and fishing grounds in order for dams to be built and for logging to proceed. Their traditional 102 economy was destroyed and few aboriginal people were able to take advantage of the jobs which were created by the capitalkt exploitation of the land they had formerly occupied. In the 1970s, aboriginal groups began to organize and demand that the state recognize their ownership of lands. which had been occupied by their ancestors thousands of years before European contact. Prior to 1992, the provincial government denied that aboriginal groups had any legitimate legal daim to what is now considered Crown land (Marchak 1995. p. 95) Thus. until recently. aboriginal groups were virtually powerless to reclaim or prevent the appropriation of their traditional lands. .\lthough in recent years criticism of the tim ber industry has been widrspread. there are still a significant number of individuals and institutions, most notably the IWA (1W.A. 1997), which continue to support the status quo. Although most residents of timber dependent communities are well aware that both unemployment rates and the amount of forested land which has been convened into clearcuts are both rapidly increasing, there is no consensus regarding the cause of job loss or the sustainability of current forestry practices. Many people can remember when corporate exploitation of forests and forest sector workers resulted in a relatively high standard of living for most residents of timber dependent communities. Furthemore, the basic assumptions of the dominant ideology remain deeply embedded in these communities. For many individuals. two decades of increasing unemployment coupled with increased timber extraction, are not enouyh to lead them to question assumptions which have come to be regarded as common sense. Thus, to a certain degree, the state and public relations representatives of timber corporations are still able to successfull y appeal to the basic assumptions of the dominant ideology when attempting to 1 O3 discredit groups and individuals who criticize capital's exploitation of labour and nature. The State's Response to the Legitimntion Crisis When liberal democratic states have their policies called into question by a significant number of citizens andfor organizations, the state is compelled to respond in some fashion in order to maintain its legitimacy. Colin Hay maintains that liberal democratic states do not typically implement reforms wtiich are designed to address the root causes of environmental crises; rather. reforms are often intended to effect just enough change to reaffirm the legitimacy of the state. This particularly applies to cases. such as capital's destruction of old gro~ahforests in B.C., in which. although the environmental crises is extremely serious. implernenting substantive reforms would entail high short-term rconomic costs, which would. in turn. jeopardize the chances of the government in power being re-elected (Hay. 1994). In its attempts to maintain its legitimacy, the New Democratic Party (NDP) governrnent, first under the leadership of Premier Michael Harcourt and later under the leadership of Premier Glen Clark. employed two sirateyies: implementing reforms which have not fundamentally chanpd the manner in which capital exploits forests and forest sector workers and engaginy in a public relations campaign designed to gain acceptance for their new programmes and discredit individuals and organizations which are critical of the govemment's labour and forest policies. The NDP govemment under Premier Michael Harcoun enacted several reforms which the government claimed would democratize land use decisions, increase forest sector jobs, and put an end to ecologically destructive timber extraction practices. The Commission on Resources and Environment (CORE) and later the Land Resource Management Plan (LRMP) process were established to increase public participation in land use decisions. Both COUand LRMP are govemment appointed bodies from industry. labour unions. environmental groups, the tourist industry and other "stakehoiders." One of the primary complaints from environmental groups involved in the LRMP process is that companies proceeded to build roads into wilderness areas and log them while the negotiations are in process. Thus, the decision regarding what would happen to a givrn area was ot'ten presentedjitit trcconipli to the other parties at the table. Consensus rnust be reached bv al1 parties at LRMP table. Which means that the managers of tiniber corporations. who despite daims to the contrary. represent a small group of corporate shareholders, Iiavr the power to veto any decision reached bv othcr parties who represent larger segments of the public. e.g. labour and environmental oqanizations. Essentially. the structure of the LMtable results in the tyranny of the minoriiy. Moreover, the government sets the parameters of the debate at the table, which allows the pvernment to retain considerable power over the process. Most significantly, the government has the right to implement whatever land use plan it sees fit, regardless of the recommendations of CORE or the LRMP participants. Through such programmes as Forest Renewal BC.and most recently Premier Glen Clark's Jobs and Timber accord, Forest sector employment was supposed to be increased throuph govemment spending on silvicultural programmes, worker re-training and govemment programmes designed to give industry incentives to invest in value added production. Numerous factors, such as the Asian econornic crisis, U.S. impon restrictions. and industry's continued attempts to reduce costs by shedding jobs have led to a net loss of Forest sector jobs in recent years. In response to the criticism of loggins practices. the provincial NDP government. under Premier Michael Harcourt, implemented the B.C. Forest Practices Code. The sovernment assured the public, "The massive clearcutting of the past will no longer be acceptable. And in sensitive areas-such as wiidlife habitat areas and near tish bearing streams-clearcuts will be outiawed" (B.C.Governmrnt Ad. quoted in SLDF 1996). One of the major flaws of the Forest Practices Code is that government bureaucrats have a great deal of latitude to exempt corporations from complying with the code. According to Michael M'Gonigle, "...the Forest Practices Code continues to gant huge levels of discretionary decision-making authority to forest ministry District Managers. the same managers who have. in the past, often been closely aligned to the industry they were intended to regulate" (M'Gonigle 1997, p. 42). The Sierra Legal Defence Fund conducted an audit of forest development plans submitted by timber corporations in Forest districts throughout the province. SLDF also had biologists do on site investigations of forest practices throughout the province. The SLDF audit showed that despite code regulations limiting the size of clearcuts to 60 hectares, many exemptions had been granted by the Ministry of Forests which allowed clearcuts in excess of 100 hectares. Funhermore, clearcutting was the extraction method used in over 90 percent of the areas being iogged. including on slopes where there was a "high risk" of land slide. Many streams were beiny logged right up to their banks. In shon, the SLDF report concluded that the Forest Practices Code had not substantially reduced the ecological impacts of logging nor was the Ministry of Forests adequately enforcing the existing regulations (Sierra Legal Defence Fund, 1996). Most recently, the 1 O6 David Suzuki Foundation. the Sierra Legal Defence Fund and Greenpeace al1 claimed that leaked government documents indicatrd that the provincial government is making changes to the Forest Practices Code intended to reduce industry costs, "behind closed doors" without any public participation or scrutiny (The Vancouver Province, April 1, 1998, p. A 8). Since most of the logging in B.C. occurs on public land. the role that the state plays in making nature available to capital is relatively transparent. Thus, the state has an interest in quashins criticism of the timber industry and of its own forest policies. The provincial government joined timber capitalists in engaging in a massive public relations carnpaign overseas to convince foreign customers tliat current forestry practices in B.C. are ecologically sustainable (hl'Gonigle. 1997) Furthermore. some politicians have rngayd in demagogic iactics to discredit environmental organizations. During summer 1997, in response to Greenpeace's criticisrns of the Forest Practices Code, NDP Premier Glen Clark referred to members of the organization as "enemies of the province" (The Globe and October 2, 1997, p. A 23). In an interior. timber dependent community, the Premier told rural residents, "Some parts of urban B.C. don't seem to realize that Our health care system, or education system- frankly the majority of what we have in the province-is hnded by the wealth generated in places like Merrit." Clark went on to say that rural residents should join the government in coontering the claims made bv Greenpeace and to help "present to the world the reality of what we' re doiny here in B.C.... .We'll have to give you some kind of resources, probably, and the organizational help so you' re part of the solution" (The Prov- Iune 22, 1997). The Western Canada Wilderness Cornmittee retaliated against Clark's attacks by dubbing him "Jurassic Clark, Enemy of Beautiful B.C." and accusing him 1 O7 of taking B.C. back to the time of "political dinosaurs" (The Globe and Mail March 7. 1998. p. A 9). Clark eventually toned-down his anti-environmentalist rhetoric . During spring 1998, Clark scheduled a meeting with Greenpeace. Western Canada Wilderness Cornmittee. and other environmental groups to "listen to their concerns" (Victoria News. March 6. 1998. P 4). While the NDP has a vested interest in defending its forest and labour policies. attackinp environmental organizations also threatens to undermine its legitimacy A recrnt study (Blake. Guppy, and Urmetzer. 1996-07). showed that next IO supponers of the Green Party, those voten who support the NDP showed the hiphest level of concern for environmental issues. Therefore. when Clark attackrd Greenpeace. he was l i kely criticizing an organization which a substantial number of NDP supponers either belons to or sympathize with. This puts the NDP in a very precarious position. While it may be in its interest to quash criticisrn of its environmental policies, it also cannot afford to alienate its environmcntally concemed supporters. Timber corporations are not under the same constraints as sovernments. Therefore, they have played a much more active role than the state in defendiny the status quo. Capital's Response to the Legitimation Crisis In the late 1980s, timber capitalists began to cooperate with one another in an atternpt to convince the public that industrial forestry practices are sustainable, present no threat to biodiversity, and are economically beneficial to the general public. Timber capitalists have attempted to create a dichotomy which places s hareholders, al1 forest sector businesses and 108 empioyees (regardless of social class), on one side of the conilict and al1 those who criticize industry practices on the other. .4nother major facet of the corporate campaign is to insinuate that the environmental movement is responsible for job losses and rernains a significant threat to job security. .Ml of the above tactics not only obscure serious threats to forest sector jobs and forest eco-systerns. but are also intended to create anirnosity between the two social movements which are most active in challenging capital's esploitation of its production conditions. Ratlier than directly engaging in a public relations campaign. tirnber capitalists have sagaciouslv chosen to retain the services of public relations experts. who have in turn established pseudo-grassroots organizations and public relations enterprises which operate nt the provincial. national. and international levels. Timber cûpitalists operating in B.C. haïe relied heavily on the expertise of Ron Arnold. one of the founders of the anti- environmentalist Wise Use Movement in the U.S. He is also the Executive Vice President of the Centre for the Defence of Free Enterprise (Canadian Library of Parliament. Executive Summary of Shore Groirps iii Brirish C'olrcrnhiu, 199 I), president of the Washington State chapter of the MC(American Freedom Coalition), and a member of the speakers bureau for CAUSA (Confederation for the Unification of the Societies of the Amerkas), (Deal 1993. pp. 2 1 -22). In a Canadian Library of Parliament investigation. both CAUSA and the MC have been identified as part of the political amof the Rev. Sun Myung Moon's Unification Church. These orsankations provided financial support to the Nicaraguan Contras and right- wing governments in Latin America (The N&o ThApril 14. 1992. p. A 8). It has also been alleged that the Wise Use movement in the U.S.has connections with the Unification Church (Canadian Library of Parliament, Research Branch. December 10. In the late 1980s. Arnold cautioned Canadian forest industry executives against ovenly engaging in anti-env ironmentalist campaigns. "The public is completely convinced that when you speak as an industry, you are speaking out of nothing but self-interest. The public will never love any big business and a neyative industry PR campaign against environrnentalists will drive the public to embrace your enemies sooner than side with you. The timber industry is its own worst possible advocrte. .." (Arnold. 1989). lnstead of directlv anacking environmental organizations. Arnold advised timber capitalists to establish and financially support "pro-industry citizen activist" groups. While Arnold assured corporate executives that financing local pro-industry groups would likrly be one of thsir "wisest investments over time" he maintained that environmentalists must be fought at the regional as well as the local level Thus. Arnold advised timber corporations operatiny in Canada to augment local ant i-environrnentalist groups with an orsankation that operated at the provincial, national, and international levels. My experience says that you will ultimately need some general purpose nonprofit citizen group roughly equivalent to the Center for the Defense of Free Enterprise. 1 say roughly because whatever you do must be completelv Canadian, in narne, form and operation. What such an institute must do that a local issue citizen group cannot do is threefold: First, it must be mn by a director with yood political contacts to work with al1 Canadian land use issues as they emerge. Such an institute must help local groups gain access to politicians and the national media, and coordinate whatever information resources may be needed to deal with developing issues. Second, it musi publish books, articles and other media features designed to yradually shift the intellectual climate toward the approval of the forest products industry in Canada. It must take every opportunity to recruit opinion leaders to write and speak in favour of permanent multiple use policies and find outlets for their messages. Third. it must create a long-tem unfinishable agenda and train interns to carry the multiple use philosophv into every corner of Canadian society. It must initiate tactical programs of Iegislation, litigation and public pressure designed to change every non-tim ber land-use desi ynation in Canada to multiple use within 50 years (Arnold. 1989). In British Columbia. local corporate tinanced pro-industry citizen's action groups have emerged in the form of Share BCWhen hired by the B.C.timber corporation. Macklillan-Bloedel (MB) to help with their public relations campaign. Ron Arnold advised them to establish and finance these pseudo-grassroots organizations. He counselled MB to "give them the rnonev. You stop defending yourselves. let them do it. and you get the hell out of the way. Because citizens groups have credibility and industries don't" (Arnold quoied in Rowell 1996. p. 183). .Although the current Executive Director of Share BC. Michael Morton did not reply to the author's request for information regarding the sources of Share's funding, corporations such as Macmillan-Bloedel. Fletcher-Challenge. Noranda. Canadian- PacitÏc Industries, and Furney Distributing have been identified as acting "on behalf of Share Groups. often behind the scenes rather than publicly" (Canadian Library of Parliament, Research Branch. July 10, 199 1 A, pp. 10- 1 1). In the late 1 980s Share groups began to ernerge in timber dependent communities throughout the province (eg, Share the Stein. Share Our Forests, Share Our Resources. North Island Citizens for Shared Resources, Share the Clayquot, etc.). They have done their best to integrate themselves into local communities by setting up displays in malls. taking out ads in newspapen, distributing signs and bumper stickers. Although Share groups present themselves as grassroots organizations concerned with the economic survival of rural comrnunities, an investigation by the Canadian Library of Parliament concluded: Althouyh grassroots movements, advocacy and lobbying are considered normal. legitimate and desirable in a democratic society, such activity is open to criticism if it deliberately rnisrepresents. deceives, or conceals the identity of the interests involved and their desired objectives and goals. U'itli respect to BC Sliarr groups. the forestry companies have provided these "local citizens coalitions" with much of their organizational and financial backing. Their apparent objective has been to pi t labour against environmentalists and environmentally-oriented persons. Their effect has been to divide communities and create animositv in the very places where honest communication and consensus should be encourased. W hile the ran k and file membership of the Share movement may not be aware of its connection with the Wise Use movement, the tactics and lanyuage of the two movements indicate a coinmon source of counseiling and training, namel~.Ron Arnold and his associates (Canadian Library of Parliament. Research Branch, Decembrr 10. 199 1 B. pp. 45-46). In response to the negative pub1 ici ty senerated b y the above mentioned Pari iarnentary investigations and several newspaper articles. the leadership of Share has denied that the oryanization is connected to the Wise Use movement or that it receives money from timber corporations. In 199 1. Mike Morton denied that Share groups received tinancial backing from timber corporations. Share's current policy is to acknowledge that it receives money from corporations, but will not disclose detailed information (Rowel l 1996, p. 1 9 1 ). Patrick Armstrong, who has been instrumental in organizing Share groups throughout B.C., admitted that he used to coordinate activities with Ron Arnold. but that he had since stopped al1 contact with Arnold due to his "ultra-conservative" politics. After interviewing Armstrong, Richard Watts, a reporter with the Times Colon& contacted Arnold. Arnold described Armstrong as "an old friend" who he had known "for some time ....1 admire the man." 113 Arnold also stated that he had given seminars to the Share the Stein Cornmittee. MacMillan- Bloedel, the BC Mining Association, and the Council of Forest Industries (Times Colonist May 19, 1994). The Forest Alliance .As nientioned above. in iht: latr 1980s Ron Arnold advised timber capitaiists that an organization which operates at provincial. national, and international levels was needed to augment the anti-environmentalist campaign at the local level. Such an organ ization was needed to provide the local yroups with information and political contacts and to publish books and articles that would increase public approval of timber corporations. It was also imperative that such an organization be headrd by a person with "good political contacts to work with ail Canadian land use issues as they rmerg " The founders of the Forest .Alliance apparently followed Arnold's advise. The Forest Alliance (FA) was established in 1 99 1 by the New York City based. pub1 ic relations firm. Burson-Marsteller (BM). Burson-Marsteller specializes in designing public relations cam paigns for corporations who bave created environmental disasten. Among BM's most prominent public relations campaigns have been its handling of Exxon's oil spill off the shore of Valdez, Alaska and its campaign to improve Union Carbide's image after a chlorine gas leak in the multi-national's Bhopal, India plant killed numerous people in a nearby village. Thirteen timber corporations, including MacMillan-Bloedel, Weyerhaeuser of Canada, and Fletcher Challenge provided the Forest Alliance with $1 million for its first year budget (Rowell 1 996. pp. 195- 196).The current Forest Alliance Chairman, Jack Munro will not publicly disclose information regarding the FA'Sfinancing (Correspondence from Munro to author, November 19, 1996). 113 Munro is the former President of the IWA. Munro, along with the FA'S Executive Director, Patrick Moore, are the two main spokespersons tor this public relations organization. Munro has political contacts ranging from his warm relationship with Prime Minister Jean Chretien right down to the local villase councils in B.C. Munro holds press conferences and appears on talk shows defending the practices of timber corporations and attacking the environmental movement. Patrick Moore was one of the original members of Greenpeace. Moore is highly qualified io act as a public relations representative for timber corporations. Not only is he a former environmental activist. Moore Srew up in timber dependent communities and his father was employed in the forest industry His background enables Moore to prrsent himself as someone who is concerned about the environment and is also in touch with the concerns of the rural working class. In addition. Moore's PhD in ecology enhances his credibi lity when he purpons to have an unbiased. scientifically based view of forestry or when he accuses environmental orsankations like Greenpeace of being, "unwilling to listen to the science on their whole forestry campaign" (Moore quoted in . . Rowell 1996, p. 182). Moore recently published a book, wicUirit: The Forest Rebom (Moore, 1995) which defends industrial logging practices. He travels throughout Nonh America, South America, and Europe, speaking on behalf of timber corporations. Moore also frequently writes editorials for newspapers which attack the forest policies of various environmental groups. Patrick Moore resigned from Greenpeace in the early 1980s and currently has no connections with that organization. Although he is an outspoken critic of Greenpeace's forest campaign, Moore uses his former connections with Greenpeace to en hance his credi b i lity . According to Greenpeace forest cam paign worker Tamara Stark, after Moore left Greenpeace, "he was quite bitter. there was a coup...... people were struggling for control of Greenpeace and he lost the gambie and since then has not been on the same side of the fend (Tamara Stark. author interview. November 20, 1996). In regard to former environmental activists. who like Moore, have since become spokespersons for various industries and have used their personal histories as a means of gaining the public's trust. David Suzuki commented. "...after betraying Jesus, Judas wouid have had little credibility arguiny, "Tmst me. 1 was one of the original disciples" (Suzuki 1997. p. 2 10). The Corporrte Discourse A Canadian Library of Parliament investigation concluded that. "Ron Arnold and the Wise Use movement have been credited as having done more than counsel and organize Share Groups in B.C.;they have evidently intluenced the rhetoric and vocabulary used in the resource debate... ." (Canadian Library of Parliament. December 10, 199 1 B. p. 29). As was shown above, many of the corporations that were instrumental in creating the Share groups were also instrumental in creating the Forest Alliance. Many of these same corporations also contribute money, and provide other services, to a new corporate front group, "The Soo Coalition for Sustainable Forestry" (See Appendices D and E). The Soo Coalition is based in Squamish, B.C. and apparently has particularly strong ties to the timber corporation Interfor, which according to the Soo Coalition's Executive Director. Cheryl Bass, did the editing for a Soo Coalition tabloid (author's field notes). Bass. the spouse of a logging contractor, did provide some general information on the Soo Coalition's funding but did not reply to the author's letter requesting more detailed information. The rhetoric employed by these oryanizaiions is very similar and essentially constitutes a single discourse. It is developed by public relations experts in metropolitan centres and often disseminated in mral comrnunities. As mentioned in chapter three. there is no empirical data indicating that the creation of parks or any other activities that the environmental movement has engaged in. have resulted in significant job losses among forest sector workers in British Columbia. This has not dissuaded Ron Arnold from insinuating that the environmental movement constitutes a threat to the survival of timber dependent communities. Arnold constmcts this argument by first citing statistics regarding the number of acres of land which have been designated off-lirnits to corporate exploitation He rhen goes on to describe how the environmental movement has an "unfinishable agenda" which includes gradually expanding protected wilderness areas. "This tactic of the overall strategy I cal1 i~icremrti~c~li.~~~~.If you do things incrementally. one step at a time. nobody sets alarmed and your opposition is small, local and easy to defeat. It requires environmental leaders great patience. persistencc and an institut ional memory to operate on i>icerernomlism" (Arno Id, 1989). Such arguments are likely put fonh in hope that the intended audience will either infer that there is a c-ut~st!ard rpcr relationship between the creation of parks and jobs loss, or that, even though environmentalists have not yet caused economic hardship for forest workers, their "unfinishable agenda" will ultimately result in job losses. In rural communities, public relations firms have attempted to instill xenophobic fears of environmentaiists. After conductiny ethnoyraphic research and open-ended interviews with forest sector workers in northwestem Ontario, Thomas Dunk concluded that the workers frequently associated environmentalists with the urban middle-class. Furthermore, their own identities were constmcted in opposition to these images of environrnentalists. Thus, a dichotomy is created between the rural working class, which has direct, practical knowledge of the environment and the urban. middle class environmentalists who do not directly engage in material interchanges with nature. and therefore have tlawed ideas regarding forestry issues (Dunk, 1994). As Hornberg has noted. ". . . . 'global' açtors from outside will attempt to evoke local frarneworks and reference-points for purposes of political or commercial intiltration" (Hornberg 1994, p. 260).The public relations rsperts. who work on behalf of timber capitalists. are aware of the images thnt some rural forest sector workers have of environnientaliçts. and they have incorporated these images into their own discourse. For instance. the Vancouver-based public relations tirm. Robertson and Rozenhart advised the Northem Forest Products Association to tell rural residents the following: Foreign-funded urban-based environmentalists have no right to tell citizens of smaller communities how to live their lives. Tell the meeting about your rural values. Why do you live in the nonh? What do you want for your future and your kids' future? Fix the cities and then corne up to our communities.' Patrick Moore (a resident of Vancouver) frequently utilizes the images that some rural workers have of environmentalists to his advantage. In defence of clearcutting, Moore This is an excerpt from a November 13, 1996 memo written by Peter Moonen of Robertson and Rozenhart to the Northern Forest Products Association. The purpose of the memo was to advise the Northern Forest Products Association on how to discredit the video, "Forests Forevef ', a documentary produced by the Victoria, B.C. based film Company Variations on a Wave. Il7 has remarked: "The rough and jumble of stumps and woody debris just doesn't look very "neat and tidy" to people who are familiar with clean streets and perpendicular lines. As my friend and long-time Greenpeacer Jim Bohlen once said. "City people remind me of a cat trying to bury its excrement on a marble floor" (The Forest Alliance, 1994). Public ralations èsprns Iiaw utilizrd [lie pi.rcoi~ceivednotions that some rural residents have of environmentalists to their advantage. However. as will be detailed in the case study which appears later in this chapter. public relations experts make a conscious effort to avoid narratives pertaining to social class. hother tactic Frequently utilized bv corporate front groups is to reduce the scope of the debate regarding land use io narrow dichotomies. Presenting an issue in terms of dichotomies is a powerful tool for manipularing the intended audience's perception. First. dichotomies lirnit decisions to only two possibilities, which in turn impedes the ability of social actors to imagine alternatives to the status quo (Feldman 1995. p. 53). For instance, the debate becomes a choice between continuing unsustainable tirnber extraction practices or the complete cessation of logging, e.g., "jobs vs. the environment." Sustainable loyging practices and value added manufacturing never enter the debate. Dichotomies also tend to appear in the forni of9binary oppositions. "Binary oppositions, such as scientist versm- environmentalist or jobs vrrws the environment, are used to place two things in a hierarchy, to ensure that one is favoured over the other (Richardson, Sherman, and Gismondi 1993, p. 16). Binary oppositions are often created by an organization projecting a positive image of itself or by imposing a negative image on an individual or other oqanization. For instance, ihroughout British Columbia, Share groups have distributed signs and bumper stickers 118 proclaiming, "We Support the Forest Industry." Thus. the debate over land use is between those who "support" the forest industry Le.. the right of forest workers to remain employed. the survival of rural communities), versus those who do not ie., "anti-logging interests." Creating the dichotomy between those who "suppon" the forest industry and those who do not, is a critical component of the corporate campaign. During the Persian Gulf War. the Bush administration attempted to reduce the scope of the debate as consisting of a conflict between those who "support our troops" and those who did not. Like a nation going to war. timber capitalists must blur the contlictiny interests created by social class and convince rank-and-file worken that criticism of corporaie practices is tantamount to criticism of loggers and millworkers and a threat to forest sector jobs. Bush equated Saddam Hussein with Adolf Hitler. The implications were clear, unless Hussein was forced to retreat from "tiny" Kuwait. he would pose a thrrat to al1 Americans. According to Former MP Bob Skelly: "The clear indication from companies was that environmentalists are trying to take away your jobs, and therefore if you attack the environmental groups, your jobs will be protected" (Skelly quoted in Rowell 1996. pp. 188-189). The term "environmentalist" is rarely used by corporate front groups. As evidenced by the multitude of corporations and politicians who have described themselves as "environmentalists" or as beiny "environmentally responsible", the term "environmentalist" has corne to have positive connotations. Therefore. iabelliny an opponent an "environmentalist" will not necessarily have the desired effect. This is likely the reason that the terni "preservationist" is often used in place of "environmentalist" to describe those who challenge corporate exploitation of land by both the Wise Use movement and Share Groups 119 (Library of Parliament 199 I B, p. 30). Share members describe themselves as being "real environmentalists" who advocate "sharing" resources and "multiple use" and/or *'sustainable development" of forested land, and who are opposed to the misguided policies of "preservationists." Ron Arnold, who as mentioned above, 1s the Executive Vice President of the Centre for the Defense of Free Enterprise. frequently asserted that the environmental movement was a smaller component of the Cold War conflict between communism and cnpitalism. He has been quoted as saving that the environmental movement is a communist conspiracy led by marijuana smokers (Rowell 1996. p. 183) and that he had rvidence proving that the Soviet Union was financing the Green Party in West Germanv (Library of Parliament July 10. 199 1 A. p. 30). As will be discussed below, despite the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War, Share groups still daim that environmental activists are "eco-rnanists" who have an "anti-man ayenda". The two terms are. of course, mutually exclusive (See. Pepper. 1993). Patrick Moore also wrote an article for the Vancouver Sun stating that cornmunists had infiltrated the envi ronmental movement and that many environmentalists are ant i-human, anti-free trade. ant i-free enterprise, and anti-technoloyy, and anti- democratic, and anti-civilization (Rowell 1996, pp. 20 1-202). Arnold has also accused the environmental movement of having an "anti-human agenda" which includes destroying civilization and humankind, whereas. the Wise Use movement is portrayed as having altruistic goals. Arnold maintains that, "We want you to be able to exploit the environment for private gain, absolutely. And we want people to understand that it is a noble goal" (The TorontoDecember 21, 199 1, p. D 6). At the 120 local level, Share activists maintah that environmentalists not only want to stop "progress". they want to abolish the technology developed by previous generations and force rural residents to forsake modern cornforts and live in "caves." In British Columbia, Patrick Moore has made great efforts to present the debate over the use of forests as consisting of a conflict between rational. objecti~~escientists. like himself, versus rnisguided and dangerous environmental ists. According to Xkmrr. "the environmental movement's position [regarding forestry] is misleading, illogicai ...... A maior effort is needed to give the pubiic and Our political leaders a more logical. internally consistent. science-based perspective on the issue of forestry. 1 intend to be pan of ihat effort ..." (Patrick Moore, letter to the BribRiver Lillooer News October 9. 1997. p 6) Sean Reel. the PPWC's National Foresiry Officer. commented on how Moore's claini's of expert knowledge can be a powerful tool for misleading the public. "1 was in a bookstore ...and this guy and his wife were walking out. probably a logger in his Fifties or later and he had this book by Patrick Moore..and he was clenching it like a bible, this guy is a doctor and he knows..he's sot a suit. he's sot a beard and a couple of degrees etc. and he knows the "truth." ... if he's talking about hieh elevation logging, 1 can takr you out there and show you what happens when you remove trees etc., at high elevaiion, you get slides, you get erosion" (Sean Reel, author interview Iuly 9, 1997). Despite his daims of possessing expert knowledge, Moore seldom cites scientific studies or uses formai loyic to support his arguments. Like othen defenders of corporate practices (Richardson, Sherman, and Gismondi 1993, p. 17), Moore has learned that metaphors are a powerful tool for convincing an audience that any reservations they may 131 have reyarding capital's exploitation of forests are unfounded. For instance, he frequently equates corrigible disturbances of forest eco-systems, like clearcuts, with incorrigible natural disturbances li ke forest fires. During a public presentation in a timber dependent community. Moore contended, "In the right light. clearcuts look yood. They are temporarv meadows of tlowers. ...lf forests were not capable of recovery tiom total destruction there would be no forests. They don't need human assistance to recover Losging is a form of natural destruction. as we are part of nature" (wRiver Lillooet News October 16, 1996. p. 3) Lilfooet BC: A Ciase Study of Corporilte Proprganda As the following case study illustrates. not only do corporate front groups ~itilizethe propnganda techniques described above. some individuals with connections to these organizations, use threats of violence and other forrns of intimidation to quash voices of dissent. Data were gathered by attending public meetings. reviewing relevant documents, and conducting open ended interviews with some of the principle actors involved. The situation beyan in late Augist 1996 when the Sierra Legal Defence Fund (SLDF), operating on behalf of its clients, Western Canada Wilderness Cornmittee (WCWC) and Tyav Air Services, wrote a letter to the Lillooet District Forest Manager alleging that Ainsworth Lumber Company had violated numerous provisions of the Provincial Forest Practices Code. The lener, which was also sent to the Ministry of Forests and the Ministry of Environment concluded: We are certain that if you investisate these allegations surroundin!: the conditions of the roads in area CP 140 you will find these assertions to be tnie. You will find that sipnificant remedial works are required to bring these roads up to the standards expected by the public and anticipated by the code. In the meantime, it would not be orudcnt to approve any new road permits or permit any new construction to take place until this is done. This letter sent Ainsworth Lumber Company, the Forest Alliance, and the local Share group into action. On August 29, lW6. Ainsworth circulated an "intorrnation bulletin" to al1 of its employees and subcontractors . The memo identified Tya. Air Services and WCWC as SLDF's clients. drnied SLDF's allegations and claimed that the SLDF "works on behalf of anti-Iogging interests. It is not committed to the public interest or consensus based resolution of disputes. but solely to the use of litiyation to [sic] promote funher political ayenda." This memo is significanr in that it identifies Tyax Air Services, which is pan of Tyax Reson. a local reson that caters to eco-tourists. üs being "anti-logying". In timber-dependent communities. "anti-logging" is synonynious with "anri-job" A local logger informed Tyax Resort president Gus Abel that Ainsworth had sent a foreman to speak to al1 of its logging crews. The Ainsworth foreman allegedly told the loggers not to buy any expensive Christmas presents because they might al1 soon lose their jobs due to the actions taken by Gus Abel (Gus Abel. author intewiew, January 28, 1997). Ainsworth had taken the first step in exacerbatiny fear of job loss amony workers and creating a scapepat for their fears. It is important to note that the SLDF did not recommend that logging be ceased in the Brid~eRiver area. Furthemore, neither Tyax Reson or Western Canada Wilderness Cornmittee can be classified as "anti-logging interests". The WCWC supports sustainable forestry practices. Tyax Reson president Gus Abel holds cuniny rights on some Crown land and is cunently in the process of having a forester design a forestry plan that will harvest the 123 timber in an ecoloyically sustainable manner. The SLDF cannot accurately be characterized as either "pro-logging" or "anti-logginy". SLDF is a nonprotït, environmental law firm. it acts in the interests of its clients, whose positions on logging have been quite varied (Greg McDade, Executive Director of the SLDF, author interview. December 19, 1996). On September 7, 1996. Gus Abel, president and pan owner of Tyax Reson discovered that his business was being blockaded. Abel went to the blockade to speak with the protestors. Several people threatened to "torch" the reson and one man attempted to physically attack Abel He was restrained by other protestors. Two days later, Share member. Linda Skutnik. (whose father owns a tleet of logging trucks and whose husband is a loyging contractor) visited Gus Abel at his home. In a written statement to the RCiCfP, .Abel recoun ted : She said the loggers are hstrated and are told of future layoffs. Then these workers will have a lot of free tirne to set up more blockades or to come to Tyax to raise hell. She said right now there are 250 loggers and truck drivers waiting for her to cal1 back with positive news. She insisted that I distance myself from the Sierra Leyal Defence Fund. If 1 don't the loggers might come up this evening and she said she was afraid of our safety. She said if she would not have intervened the loggers would have been up here already. 1 agreed to send a letter to the editor in this regard. I was scared again. In the evening, BCTV broadcast the road block and I saw Linda Skutnik saying to the camera that 1 do not care if people lose their jobs and livelihoods. It then came clear to me that she was the initiator of it all. Because she had earlier told me that she had calmed down the blockaders and now on television it was showiny her stirring up the emotions of people! 1 was up al1 night. Abel then began receiving anonymous telephone calls threatening acts of violence against himself, his family, and the reson. 124 On September 13. a panel of speakers appeared at a local gymnasium in Lillooet. Prior to this meeting, siyns were posted throughout the community stating, "LILLOOET IS IN DANGER!" and ursing local residents to attend the meeting-.Several Share members were on this panel. Most of the speakers reiterated the same theme: there was no validity to the SLDF's allegations and that the community did not need "outsiders" telling them how to manage "their" forests. Chris O'Connor. a management level employee of Lytton Lumber. who was featured in a Share tabloid (Share the Stein: A Citizen's Publication) arguing against the creation of a provincial park in the Stein \'alley. was on the panel. That wening. O'Connor warned that the park was created despite the opposition of local communitv interests (Bridur River Lillooet News September 18. 19%. p. 3). Mike Nikkrl. a management irvel employee of Bridpside Hisa sawmill warned the audience about how. "environmentalists". had pressured the federal government into creating a federal park on South Moresby Island. Nikkel stated that he considered himself an environmentalist. As a means of indicating that he did not consider the people involved in creating the national park genuine environmentalists, Nikkel gestured with his fingers to make quotation marks each time he referred to social activists as "environmentalists." The implications of Nikkel's and O'Connor's speeches were clear: environmentalists had prevented losging elsewhere and it could happen again in Lillooet, which would in turn result in high levels of unemployment. Lloyd Stock, a local businessman, stepped up to the microphone and assened that at the behest of U.S. Vice President Al Gore, the Sierra Legal Defence Fund was being covenly financed by the CIA in order to halt the expon of Canadian lumber to the U.S. Local Share member, Linda Skutnik, who was on the speaker's panel, asserted that, "The Sierra Legal Defence Fund, if they had their way, they would have you living in a cave, half hunched over, eating the dead hind end of a coyote!" In letters to the editor of the local paper. Skutnik also wamed locals about the presence of "eco-rnarxists" with an "anti-man agenda" and that certain members (whom she failed to identify) of the local community resource board. "are associated with large corporate funded, radical preservationist groups" (Bridge River Lillooa News October 9. 1996. p. 5 and Febniary 5. 1997. p. 6). Two local men stood at the door of the gymnasium and passed out literature from the SLDF explaining its actions in the Lillooet ürea. One woman snatclied the literature from the hands of sevrral people who were attempting to read the literature and shredded it to pieces. Both of the men who were passing out the literature received verbal threats of physical violence. Share BC and the Use of Physical Intimidation Some of the threats described above were made by anonymous individuals. However, it is possible to ver@ that at least some individuals associated with Share are willing to use thinly veiled threats of violence as a means of quashing criticism of timber corporations. Linda Skutnick's warning that unless Tyav Reson president Gus Abel disassociated himself from the SLDF, he would be in physical danger is one such instance. Karen Mahon. a Greenpeace forest campaiper was threatened by Patrick Armstrong, one of the principal organizers of Share groups in B.C. Mahon attended a meeting at Western Forest Products. Armstrony was also there. representing Share BC. According to Mahon: We had our meeting..... he made ii very clear that he had been following al1 of our movements. Then, at the end of the meeting, he followed me out of the room and whispered in my ear "By the way, how is your son doing?" .... He's never met my kid, he's never seen me with a kid. it was meant to intimidate me..At totally had its effect, 1 was totally shaken ...he's letting me know that he's being paid by the industry essentially to watch you and know what your life is and where you're vulnerable. as a person n~tas an activist (Karen Mahon, author interview, December 3, 19%). Tzeporah Bernian who also works for Greenpeace had a similar encounter with Armstrong: 1 rèiiieiiibri- buiiiping iiito Patrick Armstrong whom I am sure you know of. . . .Ibumped into him at an airport once and he said, "So. you must be on vour way to Amsterdam now 1 hear you have this new job. You're only there for about six months right? And then you're leaving to San Francisco." And it's just the kind of thing that is very disconcerting. Because none of that was public knowledge. How do those people know so much about Our \ives1?.. . .That kind of thiny is. "We' re watching you" intimidation. that is very personel (Berman. author interview, March 70. 1997). The threats made against Gus Abel began to take their toll. On one occasion he sat up al1 night guarding his home with a hunting rifle. Our of fear for their safety. Abei sent his wife and children to Vancouver. In late September, primarily due to threats against himself. his family, and his business. Abel ceased to be SLDF's client. However. Western Canada lderness Cornmittee has continued to be SLDF's client. The Forest Alliance Cornes to Lillooet The Forest Alliance uses more subtle, sophisticated tactics than the Share groups. On September 20. 1996. Jack Munro. the Chairman of the Forest Alliance, met with Gus Abel. Abel described Munro as being quite affable. A represeniative from the Cariboo Lumber Manufacturer's Association, and a representative from the Counsel of Tourist Industries were also at this meeting. The Cariboo Lumber Manufacturer's Association is funded by 1 Y timber corporations (see appendix F)' and has direct connections to the Wise Use movement in the U.S. and was an active participant in constnictin~the Wise [kAgeriJu, a report that was produced at a Wise Use conference in Reno Nevada in 1988 (Canadian Library of Parliament. December 10. 199 I B. pp. 2 1-22). The objective of the meeting with Tpx resort was for the four parties to issue igroup press release regarding Tyas's position on the forest industry and Tyax's relationship with the Sierra Legal Defence Fund. Accarding to Gus Abel, "we could not reach an agreeable text because thev wanted me to slander the SLDF " In early October. 1996. Patrick hloore. the Director of the Forest Alliance made a public speech in Lillooet. The presentation was sponsored by the Cariboo Lurnber Manufacturer's Association and Share BC. To the casual obsewrr. it likely appeared ihat Moore's presentation was at least in pan sponsored by a local. grassroots organization concerned with protecting the local economy. In reality, three corporate financed public relations enterprises coordinated efforts to discredit the Sierra Legal Defence Fund and to justify controversial corporate practices like clearcuts and mechanization. Moore bepan his presentation with a discussion of forest ecology. During his presentation, Moore assened that: "In the right light, clearcuts look good. They are temporary meadows of flowers, ...... lf forests were not capable of recovery from total destruction there would be no forests. They don't need human assistance to recover. Loggins is a fom of natural destruction, as we are pan of nature" @ri& River Lillooet News, The Cariboo Lumber Manufacturer's Association refused to divulge information regarding its budget or the sources of its funding (Correspondence from Susan Ronalds, Office Manager of the Cariboa Lumber Manufacturerd Association, to author, July 27, 1998). October 16, 1996. p. 3). Throughout his presentation. Moore continued to reiterate the assertion that forests would naturally regenerate themselves and that clearcutting posed no threat to biodiversity or the fishing and tourist industries. Moore told the crowd that he had flown over the area where the SLDF Iiad alleged that violations of the Forest Practices Code took place. He assured the crowd that the allegations were not tme and advised the crowd to "Tell the environmentalists to %O back to Vancouver, or wherever they came from." Moore characterized environmentalists as beiny "nuts. stupid and ignorant. Thev are leading our children in a dangerous direction " He urged the crowd to defend themselves ayainst the "outsiders" and to "Bring in people who can help you work with military precision Act like it is a war-a peaceful war- but fight like hell" (Bridge River Lillooet News, October 16. 1996. p. 3). Although Moore qualified his statement by encouraging local residents to engage in a "peaceful war". Lillooet. and B.C. in general, have a history of environmentalists being the target of violent attacks (e.g..The ancouver Sun March 6. 1990). It is very doubtful that ~Mooreis unaware of the potential consequences of encouraying people who are fearful of losing their jobs to. "tight like hell." During the question and answer period of the presentation, Rod Webb, a local electrician stated that he objected to the use of feller bunchers, a piece of heavy equipment that mechanically fells and limbs trees, because they increase corporate profits and put people out of work. Moore asked, "Why should you be concerned with how much profits the corporations are makins?" Webb replied, "Because I'd rather see the profits go to the working man." Moore stated that for some vaguely defined reason, he never discusses issues pertaininy to "social class" (author's field notes). He also refùsed to discuss the source of his income or his relationship with timber corporations. Coun ter- ldeology nt the Local Level Not al1 local residents uncritical l y accepted the claims made by industry representatives. Local residrnts raised rnoney to brins in their own "espert". eco-forester Herb Hamrnond. to give a public presentation to counter the clairns made by Moore and others regarding the social desirabi lity and ecological impact of current logging and milling practices. Farmers. trappers. and other local residents spoke at public meetings or wrote letters to the editor of the local paper. expressing concern about how current loggin- practices would affect the environment and their livelihoods. Local efforts like the above not oniy challenge the "expert" knowledge of industry representatives. thev also undermine the local-outsider dichotomy which corporate front groups have tried to create. Representatives from Ainsworth Lumber Company. The Forest Alliance. and the local Share group, al1 warned that the actions taken by the SLDF posed a serious threat to the local economy. A year after the Sierra Legal Defence Fund accused Ainsworth Lumber Company of engaying in multiple violations of the Provincial Forest Practices Code. no job losses had occurred due to the actions taken by the SLDF. However, due to restructuriny at the Ainsworth mil1 in Lillooet, fifty-five millworkers lost their jobs. At the time. more job losses were anticipated when the Company completed its final "upgrade" of machinery (wRiver-L illooet News October 1, 1997 p. 7). Poputar Support For Corporate Front Groups Determining the degree of popular support for corporate front groups is a difficult task. None of the above mentioned oqanizations were willing to publicly disclose detailed information regarding their membership or sources of funding. Despi te several phone calls and one personal visit to the public relations tirm Rozenhart and Robenson, the agency refused to disclose any information regarding who its clients are or the nature of its business. While it is apparent ttiat these groups have the resources to print political propasanda on a large scale.' pay for and orgrnize events such as lectures in timber dependent communities. and have had some degree of success in exacerbating the fears of rural residents, these are not necessarily indicators of a hi& degree of support for these organizations among rank- and-file forest sector workers. .As will be discussed in chapter seven, many of the Pulp, Paper. and Woodworkers of Canada niernbers who panicipated in this project questioned the credibility of the Forest Alliance. Moreover. many of the workers considered the Forest Alliance's chairman. former IWA president Jack Munro, to be a self-serving individual who worked as a stooge for timber capitalists In the case study which was detailed above, the individuals who utilized Share rhetoric and/or identified themselves with that organization were all either manayement level employees of timber companies. logging or truckins contractors, or the spouses of contractors. In regard to Gus Abel's relationship with the SLDF,Skutnick commented. "We want him to try to imagine how a person feels when the? For instance, Share the Stein, a Share group based in Lytton , BC whose population is under 2,000 was able to print and distribute 150,000 copies of an eight page tabloid, Shaw the Stein (Rowell, 1996). 131 have half a million dollars tied up in logging equipment and they face the prospect of not being able to make next month's payment" (Bridye River Lillooet News. September 1 1. 1996, p. 2). The short terrn interests of contractors who have invested in capital intensive extraction equipment. like feller bunchers. are not the same as those of rank and file loggers and millworkers. It can be assumed that the primary short-term goal of contractors is to repay loans on heavy equipment and to run their logging and trucking operations in a profitable manner. This requires access to large aniounts of tirnber The current structure of the industry. (i.e.. fragrnented production and estrncting timber tioni remote lociitions). has likely benrtïtted truck loggin- contractors Hence. at least in the slion term. niaintainin- the status quo is in the interest of contractors who have invested in capital intensive rquipment The SLDF employees who investigated Ainsworth's practices in the Bridge River had done sirnilar audits al1 over the province. they indicated that Share had stronyer support in the Lillooet Forest District than in other areas of BC (Group interview with Will Horter. John Werring and Mitch Anderson. January 14. 1997). Of the thiny coinmunities listed as being represented by Share groups (Share pamphlet. A Ouestion of Babce in Land Use Pecisio~),four of them are located within the Lillooet Forest District and another community, Boston Bar, is located just outside of the district's borders (there are 43 forest districts in B.C.). Lillooet, with a population of just over 2.000 residents is the Iargest community in the district. Other villages. which are allegedly "represented" by Share BC, like Bralome and Lytton, have considerably smaller populations than Lillooet. This indicrtes that not only does there appear to be a concentration of Share groups in the Lillooet Forest District, but also it appears that the corporate front-group is attempting to create the perception of having broader suppon in timber communities than actually exists by publishing a list of communities "represented" by Share Groups rather than publicly dis clos in^ how many individuals actually belong to Share BC. The organization also daims that, "Cornmunity share groups do not divulge their membership lists but many groups-if not ail-have native mernbers" (Share BC, Commonlv hsked Qiiestions About Share BÇ), which is apparently an attempt to create the impression of having suppon from First Nations communities. Corporate front groups. particularly the Forest ..\lliance. have also attempted to increase their grassroots suppon by utilizing menns tliat are not typically availablt: to oganizations whiçh actually rely on individual memberships for their financial suppon Ir is less expensive to purchase a t-shirt with the Forest Alliance logo. ($10 00) than it is to purchase a t-shirt from a retail store. A junior membership in the Forest Alliance can be purçhased for $5.00, an adult membership for $1 0.00. which is substantially cheaper than the cost of a membership with most environmental organizations. Apparrntlv. the Forest Alliance even gives complirnentary memberships. Of a total of 36 PPWC members interviewed. only the National Forestry Officer, Sean Reel, was a Forest Alliance member. Reel, a supporter of B.C's Green Pany, stated that a complimentary membership was sent to him and that he does not support the FA (Sean Red, author interview, July 9, 1997). As older organizations such as the Forest Alliance and Share BC lose credibilitv with the public, new front groups which appear to have grassroots suppon from the rural working class and/or exist primarily to promote environmentally sustainable logging practices are established by tirnber capitalists. For instance, the Western Canada Watershed Cornmittee Society (WCWCS) is a relatively new corporate front group: Its name may give the impression that it is an environmental orsanization but in fact it is a pro-logginy group that describes itself in promotional material as "a group of concerned citizens"; however it is difficult to accept this completely, since the organization is being run out of the offices of Canadian Forest Products Lirnited by Company officiais. This group, whose name is similar to that of the environmental proup Western Canada W ilderness Cornmittee (WCWC), calls on people to join it in order to fight for the provision of hiyh-quality drinking water, which it daims, can be brought about through the proper management of watershed forests. No mention is made of logging, though the group obviously supports logginy in watershed forests. This has prompted some to suggest that the WCWC is attempting to mislead the public (Canadian Librarv of Parliament. Januarv 5. 1993, p. 6). In the U.S.. similar forms of "greenscarnrning" have become very common. Utility companies which destroy tish habitat by building dams have establishrd front groups like "Northwesterners for More Fish" (The New York Tirna klarch 25. 1996). The shell game currently being played by the public relations arms of timber corporations will likely continue as public awareness rezardiny corporate front groups increases and older groups like Share and the Forest Alliance lose their credibility. In regard to counter-ideoloyical strategies, it is important to note that capital and the state do not have a monopoly on "expert" knowledge. As will be discussed in the following chapter, there is a growins stable of foresten. forest ecologists, and social scientists who are extremely critical of the present structure of the industry. Claims made by capital and the state that the present stnicture of the industry is supponed by rational. objective. expert opinion is undermined by othen who also daim to possess expert knowledge and are critical of industry practices. Defining the nature and/or the existence of the present economic and ecological crises 134 is clearly a major component of the stmggle over the exploitation of land and labour. This is an issue not addressed by O'Connor. One of the major tasks for those wishing to effect social change, will be to define the nature of the multiple social problems created by the present structure of the forest industry and to define which reforms are necessary and/or desirable. The next step would be to engage in a counter-ideological cnmpaign whose aims would be to pressure the state into implernenting reforrns and gaining popular suppon for these reforms. Although labour and environmental activists have less financial resources and political intluence than tirnber capitalists. they likely have more çredibilitv with the public. More than anything else, the dramatic increase in capital's exploitation of forests and forest sector worliers. has underrnined corpornte propaganda. As more t'orest sector jobs are eliminated and old growth forest eco-systems become increasingly rare. and as criticism from academics and social activists increases, the dominant ideology will likely resonate lrss and less with the direct e'rperiences of the public and thus becorne even more costly and difficult to sustain. There are even some indications that solidarity is weakening among tirnber capitaiists. Under the leadership of CE0 Tom Stephens, MacMillan-Bloedel, which was one of the foundins members of the Forest Alliance, recently announced its pians to discontinue clear-cut logging in old growth forests. The timber corporation also withdrew its financial suppon from the Forest Alliance. Other timber corporations responded by increasing the Forest Alliance's total budget by 10 percent (Vanwuver Provin~March 3, 1999, p. A 33). The erosion of capital's solidarity and the continued elimination of forest sector jobs and forest eco-systems creates funher opportunities for social acton to suggest alternative ways of engaging in material 135 interchanges with nature, alternative ways of organizing social labour, and alternative ways of distributing political and economic power. CHAPTER FIVE COONTER-IDEOLOGIES AND ALTERNATIVE WAYS OF STRUCTURINC THE FOREST WDUSTRY "We have "p rugressed" tu the puint where the objectives uf the goud life must be cunsidered thnatening; we are inhicately implicated in a system which guarantees short-terni well-being in n smnll part 4 the wurlt-l thruugh destructive increuses i~ nutterial affluence "(Arne Naess, 1989 p. 25). Although timber capitalists and the state have considerable resources with which to reaffirm the dominant ideology and thus continue to legitimize the existins structure of the forest industry, they do not have a monopoly on "expert" knowledge nor do they exercise absolute control over the public discourse regardiny the present econornic and ecological crises. Moreover. counter-ideologies (e.g.,deep ecology) have emerged which challenge the underlyins assumptions of the dominant ideology. The rapid pace at which capital's exploitation of forests and forest sector workers has increased over the past two decades has led academics. journalists, and social activists to not only criticize the policies and practices of timber capitalists and the state, they have proposed many alternative methods of utiliziny both land and labour (e.g., Binkley, 1997; Burda, Curran, Gale, and M'Gonigle. 1997; Hammond 1997; Harnmond 1993; Marchak ,1995; M'ûonigle 1997; M'Gonigle and Parfin. 1994). As is consistent with O'Connor's theory, the practices of the provincial ~ovemment and timber capitalists, as well as the legitimacy of long standing arrangements between capital and the state, have al1 been called into question. As will be discussed in later chapters, these critiques have influenced the policies and practices of the labour movement and the environmental movement. The dominant ideology described in the last chapter is not only the dominant ideology of Canada, it is the dominant ideology of al1 Western capitalist societies. Arne Naess (Naess, 1987) has challenged some of the underlying assumptions of the dominant ideology. Naess' critique will be briefly detailed here as many of the critiques of i3.C.'~ forest industry that will be detailed below (with the exception of Binkley) implicitly reject some of the underlying values of the dominant ideology. The dominant ideology promotes the expansion of the human population, conquest of nature. and economic growth. Arne Naess (Naess. 1987) maintains that the future well-beins of both humans and non-humans requires a rediiction in the human population. particularly in industrialized nations, and recognizing the inherent wonh and the ripht to exist of non- human species. Because economic growth tends to result in increased environmental degradation, Naess contends that economic growth (at least in its present forrn) is incompatible with the well-being of humans and other species. Furthemore, even if economic growth without environmental degradation were possible, Naess questions its validity as an indicator of increased social welfare. First. a nation's yross national product (GNP),gives no indication of how the wealth is actually distributed in that nation. He also observes that if a country switches from capital intensive to labour intensive forms of production, the GNP may decrease, but the level of employment will increase. As wiil be discussed below, restructuring i3.C.'~forest industry from a capital intensive production to labour intensive production is an argument favoured by several critics. Naess also contends that placing such great emphasis on expanding the GNP tends to "favour the unlimited nature of desires" (Naess 1987, p. 1 13). Thus. people are perpetually 138 dissatisfied with what they have and must struggle constantly to obtain newer products or products which are perceived to be bener. Even if this constant increase in consumption did not result in environmental degradation, it would tend to resu!t in widespread and perpetual feelings of dissatisfaction and inferiority. An implicit aspect of many of the arguments that will be detailed below is that an ecologically and economically sustainable forest sector presupposes a willingness on the part of forest sector workers to exchange a reduction in their material standards of living for greater job security and job satisfaction. Alternative W~ysof Utilizing hndand L;ibour in BC .As discussed in chapter three. the annual allowable cut has been above the sustainable level for over two decades The need to reduce the annual allowable cut (.%AC) to a sustainable level is widely recognized (e.g.,Burda. Curran. Gale, and M'Gonigle 1997; Hammond 1992; Marchak, 1995; M'Gonigle and Parfitt. 1994). Cutting rights on Crown land have become concentrated into the hands of a few corporations. Tenure reform has also been a major focus of several critiques of B.C.'s forest industry (e.p.,Hammond 1997; Burda, Curran, Gale, and M'Gonigle 1997). Forester and social activist. Herb Hammond advocates decentralizing decision makins processes regarding the use of public forests to the local level. He contends that community forest boards comprised of interest yroups like loggers, millworken, Native bands, trappers. and ranchers are more capable of making decisions which result in sustainable use of forested land than corporate managers and government bureaucrats (Hammond 1992, pp. 23 1-238). According to Hammond: The fint test for any kind of land stewardship arrangement, would be that the control over how that land is used, be vested with a diverse, socially responsible body. That socially responsible body has to be required, Arst by law and hopefully, eventually just by a change in human values, to ensure that their activities are what 1 cal1 ecologically responsible. As well. 1 think their activities need to be balanced, in other words encouraye diversity in terms of the landscape... . I'm not a strong bel iever that giving individuals or organizations long term property rights is the way to achieve ecological responsibility and balance. I would prefer to see something, what I've always called for the last 15 years plus or so. "communitv forest boards"...... l see those boards. perhaps in i3ritish Columbia. operating in a way that they're connected with each other. but have a fair amount of autonomy. With the requirement. thto be legislated. to behave in ecologically responsible and balanced ways. But I would see within those caveats that 1 keep mentioning, that they allocate a certain parts of the land base. that wasn't in a protected network. for timber. tourism. for recreation. They would collect user fees for recreation and tourism as wrll as stumpage fees for tiinber cutting. That board would have a technical staff that would lay out roads. design timber cutting, mark timber and carry out al1 the functions that are now carried out by industry. And. because they're carried out by industry, they have a definite industry bias. Here, these people would actualiy carry out the functions with a bias of the socially responsible body, of ecological responsibility. So. they mark which trees yet cut. which trees yet left. How wide the road is, where its located. where to protect riparian eco-systems. And then they auction that wood to local producers. There's an emphasis ayain on kocd There should be bidding credits provided for people that live within, let's say a 100 kilometre radius of a panicular area ...... People could set a heyear or maybe a ten year timber sale. that would be administered b~ the staff of the community forest board. In that way you would be able to ensure that local operators had this security that people would like to have (Hammond, author interview, May 7. 1997). Interviewer: "Like yettiny bank loans?" Hammond: Yes. So you may have 5- 10 year timber sales, so people see that kind of security in front of them. You know, the kind of security that is demanded by timber companies in the current tenure system, of 15 to 25 years of replaceable licenses, that are essentially, in perpetuity licenses, is absurd in the world of business. I've run a little business for 25 years, and 1 never have more security than a year ahead of me. So, there are lots and lots of people who survive and understand that.. .So, to suggest that timber companies, including companies who want to borrow money and build pulp mills, in pans of the world frorn the US to Europe, there are people who run large, expensive plants with no guarantee of that supply and they have to %O and compete for that supply. In reality, that's what market economics is al1 about. I'm not supponing market economics by the way. But. 1 find it very curious when the industry, out of one side of their mouth. is son of screaminy loudly that al1 of what's happening is based on the market. When. out of the other side of their mouth they are saying, "give us the land, guaranter us a timber supply forever at a low stumpage rate and then we can be good capitalists." So, that's a quick summation of the mode1 that 1 would like to see replace the current tenure system. Like Harnmond, h.liGonigleand Parfitt advocate local control of timber tenures. However, they believe that local control of resources will only repeat the mistakes made by centralized control if new regdations are not implemented regarding sustainable levels of timber extraction. extracting tim ber in ways that minimize ecological damage. and protecting ecoloyically sensitive areas. Therefore. prior to transferring control of timber tenures from the provincial to local control. the province must enact legislation which develops guidelines for local control of forests. "Political devolution simply won't work in the absence of provincial legislation that protects unique areas and establishes minimum management standards through biodiversi ty guidel ines and a Forest Practices Act on public and private lands" (M'Goniple and Parfitt 1994, p. 102). In the case of B.C.'s forest industry, it is clear that a centralized bureaucracy has not resulted in the sustainable forestry practices. It seems reasonable to assume that people living close to an eco-system which they depend on, would have more of a vested interest in sustaining that eco-system than a bureaucrat from outside the region whose dependence on the eco-system is neither as direct or apparent. However, there are several potential problems 141 which could result from decentraiking control of forests. People ai the local level are often resentful of environmental regulations irnposed by the state. This has been the case in areas like Alaska or in the Adirondack Mountains of New York. In timber dependent communi~ies. local control without environmental regulations imposed by the province could result in greater ecological damaye than occurred under the control of a centralized bureaucracy. According to a recent survey. supportes of the culturally and economically sonservative Reforrn Party. "much of whose suppon cornes from resource extracthg areas of the province" (Blake. Guppy. Urnietzer 1996-97. p. 5 1). expressed less concern for environmental problerns than supporters of any other political pany (e.g.. Liberal. Green. NDP) in the survev. Thus. M'Gonigle and Parfin's concerns appear to be well founded. Moreover. given the Reform Party's neo-liberal platform. it seems doubtful its supporters would be concerned with distributing the wealth obtained from the forest in an equitable manner. Decentralization could also result in a duplication of the global economy in B.C.. where capitalists are able to move about the globe in search of cheap labour and lax environmental regulations. Rural communities could easily find themselves competing with one another to attract investments. Thus, in addition to centralized environmental regulations, labour laws regarding collective bagaining and worker safety. etc.. should also remai n centralized. Partial Cutting vs. clearcutting Harnmond also advocates making fundamental changes in the way that timber 1s extracted. As mentioned above, clearcutting is the method of timber extraction most often 143 employed in B.C. Hammond concedes that clearcutting may be the most profitable way in the short term for corporations to extract t im ber. However, conventional clearcutting methods cause long term ecological and econornic damage to local communities, which far outweigh the benefits of the relatively few jobs created by this extraction method. The ecological damage manifests itself in the forrn of loss of habitat for certain species, damaged watersheds. higher emissions of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. and damaye to the soi1 (Hammond 1993, pp. 21-3 1: Hammond. 1991). The curent Provincial Forest Practices Code, restricts the size of clearcuts hm40 to 60 hectares Esemptions to the code are still made which enable clearcuts to exceed 100 hectares (Sierra Legal Defence Fund, 1996) Hammond advocates reducing the size of clearcuts to between one and two hectares and utilizins partial cutting methods in place of clearcutting. He contends that when partial cuttiny methods are appropriately applied they enable forests to naturallv regenerate themselves while continuing to provide habitat for multiple species. Furthermore, partial cuaing methods create more jobs than conventional clearcutting methods The reason that corporations resist utilizing partial cuning methods is that the initial costs are more expensive than clearcutting. However, the long term ecological and economic costs, which are primarily borne by local communities, are much greater when conventional dearcuttins methods are applied (Hammond 1992. pp. 63-64). In contrast to Hammond, Hamish Kimmins maintains that in many cases, clearcutting is ecologically appropriate, and the most cost effective way to log in both the short-tenn and the long-tenn. Funhermore, Kimmins contends that if road building and timber extraction are done properly, the disturbances to forest eco-systems that result from clearcutting are temporary. Althouyh Kimmins concedes that a clearcut area will not resemble an old growth forestl in a single human life time, he maintains that "Given time and a reasonably constant ciimate. essentially the same forest type will yenerally redevelop" (Kimmins 1992, p. 87). .As mentioned above. Frller contcnds that clearcutting does constitute a threat to forest eco- systems. particularly old prowth dependent, or "late successional" species. However, he is very critical of Harnmond's position regarding the use of relatively srnall clearcuts and partial cutting: Interviewer: One Grizzly encounter that made a real impression on me was the effect of just having roads in some of these areas. just outside of the Stein. there was a rnother and her cubs. A few minutes later. a couple of guys. who were actually intoxicated. drove up in a tmck with rifles and they were griulv bear hunting. They didn't seem like the kind of people who would be motivated enougli to walk back.' Feller: This is another problem which 1 did not mention about clearcutting If you put roads into an area, the bears may have sufficient habitat in terms of food and cover, but you allow huniers access. so you get hunting pressures on the population which previously didn't exist. And that's one of the biggest problems with clearcutting. Its an even worse problem with partial cutting because you have to build more roads and log more valleys to set the same volume of wood. So basicall y. you threaten a much wider population than you would with clearcutting. You build fewer roads but concentrate the cut. Again, loyying in yeneral has that problem of access. ' See photographs on next page for a visual comparison of old growth and second yrowth forests. In my own opinion, huntiny is not unethical nor does it necessarily constitute a threat to the survival of a species. However, due to the demand in Asia for bear gallbladders, bear poaching poses a threat to bear populations in B.C. and elsewhere. In their interviews with poachers in Louisiana, Forsyth and Marckese found that persons who engaged in illeyal hunting were primarily motivated by "need or greed" (Forsyth and Marckese, 1993). Due to unsustainable logging practices, both access to bear habitat and rural unemployment are increasing. Thus, it can be expected that unless both capital's exploitation of labour and nature are decreased, poaching will increase. "Once you start clearcutting and you want to continue it, then the theory is that you cut at the most economicrlly appropriate time. Which is not necessarily when the forest is very old, which is when it is ecologically equivalent to an old growth. It's usually younger...80 to 120 years seems to be the average range they use for rotation age. And of course, il 120 yerr old forest is nothing like an old growth forest ..... I've seen forests that date from 1868, thrt's about 130 years, and they no where near resemble an old growth. This is on the coast, and these are fast growing forests. On the coast, it takes about two-hundred yerrs for il forest to resemble the old growth state." University of British Columbia Professor of Forestry, Michael Feller (author interview, November 10, 1997) Old growth forests contain both florr and fauna which either do not exist in second growth forests or are substentially less r bundrnt in second growth forests. However, it is not necessary to have rny specialized training in forestry to distinguish the differençe between these two eco-systems. Vancouver Island second growth forest which is rpproximately 90 yerrs old. Base of a single tree in n Vancouver Island old growth forest. After they die, ~ncienttrees become standing snags which provide dens for wildliie. When they decay and faII on the iorest ftoor, snags become "nurse logs9'which provide orgnnic mntter for newly emerging flora. Both snrgs and large nurse logs are virturlly absent from second growth fonsts...... If your AAC [annual allowable cut] is X cubic metres. and you cut your X cubic rnetres using clearcuts, basically you can get that X cubic metres from a much smaller area. Ecologically if your in the business of growiny wood, you can get larger volumes using earlier successional species. These are species that like sunshine, lots of open conditions..... partial cutting is not necessarily going to give you those conditions. ... . So, basically, you can get larger volumes of wood using clearcutting than partial cutting. Not always, but in many situations (Feller, author interview Novem ber 10, 1997). Feller advocates designating certain areas off limits to resource extraction as a means of protecting biological diversity. In areas rvhich are primarily drsignated for timber production, clearcuts are desirable in many cases because they require less land than partial cutting methods to extract and regenerate timber. Tlius. the ecological damage created by loyging is contained in a smallrr area. This is some what similar to the position taken by Clark Binkley, which will be discussed later in this chapter In regard to manufacturing, Harnmond cites statistics which indicate that not only have the number of jobs created per unit of wood decreased in B.C. during the past 30 years, the ratio of jobs per unit of wood extracted is much lower in B.C.than elsewhere (Hammond 1992, pp. 75-80). Rather than manufacturing and exporting constniction grade lumber and pulp, Hammond contends that the province should specialize in high quality, value added products like furniture and cabinets. Due to the superior quality of products made from old growth timber, value added products made from sustainably harvested timber will be able to compete in the global market. ..A grew up in a cabinet makiny business in Orepn. .4ny of us who rnanufactured wood products could tell the difference immediately between old yrowth and second growth softwoods. Old growth was clear. soft, fine- grained (from slow growing trees), and strong. It was easy to plane and shape. glued easily and held nails and screws well.. . Second-growth obtained from previously clearcut areas was the opposite-knotty, Itard coarse long yrained (from fast growing trees), and weak. It was fussy to plane and shape. gluing was unpredictable. and itdid not hold nails and screws as well as old growth. We questioned its ability to handle structural loads and knew that its coarse grain made i t a poor choice for fine woodworking.. . .Careful stewardship of remaining old growth forests and cultivation of Itigh quality wood on longer growing cycles or rotations will assure a supply of high quality wood that will always find a buyer. regardless of the price. The economic law of scarcity applies to high quality wood products such as fined grained. clear, mature wood. If it costs more to produce it. the market will pay. If these additional costs mean stable comrnunities and protected forests. then the money will be well spent (Hammond 1993. pp. 30-3 I ). Finished products create more jobs per unit of wood. Thus. less timber is required to maintain employment levels in timber dependent communities. This in turn enables a greater portion of the forest to be set aside for protecting bio-diversity and other uses such as trapping and eco-toiirism. M'Gonigle and Parfitt also advocate decreasing the AAC and making the transition from a capital intensive, high timber volume economy to a labour intensive value added economy (MIGonigleand Parfitt 1994, pp. 86-93). They maintain that the transition from a capital intensive timber industry to a value added industry which requires less timber and creates more jobs can be panially achieved by the province not renewins the forest tenures held by large corporations. These tenures could then be distributed to multiple smaller businesses that manufacture value added products. "The opportunity is obvious, al1 or a portion of al1 the major corporate tenures holders could be phased out of timber supply areas without risk of compensation" (M'Gonigle and Parfin, 1994, p. 96). Due to international agreements which increase free trade, advances in communication technology, reduced shipping costs, and other factors which have increased 148 capital's mobility, workers in Canada and elsewhere sel1 their labour in a cornpetitive global market (Teeple. 1995). When reading the works of Hamrnond or M'Gonigle and Parfia. the question which imrnediately comes to inind is. even with the advantage of a scarce commodity like old growth timber. can British Colurnbian workers emploved in the value added sector compete with workers from Latin America and elsewhere? 34. Patricia hlarchak recently cornpleted a book (Marchak, 1995) detailing the political econornv of the international logying industry. In regard to the above question. hlarchak nppears to have a cautious optimism regardinp the possibility of developing a local value added industries which are capable of competing in the international market. However. she does not believe that such an industrv at least in the short-term. woiild pav workers the kind of wages they have been receiving from the current capital intensive pulp mills and saw mills Interviewer: "IF you look at Michael M'Gontgle's thesis or Herb Hammond's thesis, they are sayins that it is possible to make the switch to more value added products in B .C..and still be able to compete because the value of the wood is high. Do you feel that this is a possibility?" Marchak: "I'm not going to be able to give you a categorical answer. because I'm not honestly sure. 1 don't think we have any choice but to believe in the power of value added. These pulp mills. well. I'm sure you can see what is happening. . .. There isn't a big future for a lot of the pulp here in B.C. anymore. Because. honestly. South America can do the pulping so much cheaper. They can grow the trees so much cheaper. They can grow plantations so much cheaper. Eucalyptus trees can be grown in seiw yrurs. to a commercial size. And they're cloned. They get the tree without the branches al1 the way up to the top...... They mil1 them relatively cheaply because it is a standard product. They yrow them 1.5 metres apart. They' re like tall cactus. Just row after row. They don't need al1 the logging roads. They don't have the steep terrain.. . .Al1 of the Brazilian pulp mills that 1 talk about in m.... they 're doubling their size every year. because they are taking up more of the market ....This has just staned. If you look at the trend and you look at the prices, for the raw material, for the labour, but labour is not the bigyest thing, it is the raw material...... FrankIy, with our land costs here. the costs of logging in this terrain and the cost of labour. we' re not even in the cornpetition. People here always said, "Oh yes. but they don? have the kind of trees we've got." ...First of all. we don't have that big a reservoir any longer. Not the reservoir that we had fifty years aso. And secondly, those eucalyptus, there has been so much biotechnology deveioped. that real l y they produce extremely pod paper. This is not an inferior paper." interviewer: "What if the province were io specialize in high quality photographie papers and ihings like that?" blarchak: "We might have a future in things like that. What we won't have a cornpetitive future in is ordinary papers. We had an advantage in the long fibres that were necessary for newsprint or for any kind of papers that were on traction. But, even that is being overcome... We have to thd Our niches. We've sot to figure out. where can this panicular combination of thing, produce a really high quality. speciality item that a whole world would want'l Brcause, we're goinri to have to replace what was a mass production industrv, with a specialized niche industry that won't employ the same number of people. The question is whether we can make enough money back to make it worth whiie. Myown take on the industry is deeply influenced by the research that i did in South America and Southeast Asia... . When i first said, these Third World countries are in hot places, they're not al1 in the southern hernisphere but they're in hot places. more southern than we are, when they set these hard wood plantations and pine plantations off the yround. they're going to swamp us. ....The foresters here, 1 remember the first time 1 put that argument out, said, "Eucalyptus will never be any good, it's just a flash in the pan." This was ten years ago. "It's not imponant. you're being taken in by this stuff." And 1 thought. "Weil, it's possible." You've sot to remember. I'm not a forester. I' m a sociologist. I haven' t had formal training in forestry . 1 mean, I've read al1 their stuff. but I haven't had forma1 training. But then, each time I went to look at these trees [in Brazil], it amazed me. 1 was just mind bogsled by what I saw. Thousands of hectares of these trees. ...Just think of harvesting every seven years. You cmset three ctops off of one tree before you have to plant again. And they're cloned, so you know exactly what you are getting. You don? need roads. All the stuff that was costing so much money here, you didn' t need.. . .And they were developing the secondary industry to yo along with it. Something we never did. They were developing the tractors. They were developins al1 the cuttins machinery . They ' re building it there. They took ours, they took it from Japan ... and then they had to adapt it to their soil. They had Massey-Ferguson tractors, which they had adapted so thoroughly, that really they had a new machine. They were developing the secondary industry dong with the primary industry.. . . .l don7 think anybody in the forest industry today would dismiss the eucalyptus plantations. Interviewer: "Do you think it would be possible for BC.to gain a niche in the international f'urniture market?" Marchak: "Yrs I do. But, labour. particularly the IWA. which has opposed any kind of fumiture industry in B.C.. labour wouid have to be prepared to accept the very low wages required for the period of time to get such an industry off the ground And that could be twenty years. They're going to be competing for example, with the low end mass producers like Ikea. But. after all, somebody staned that and turned it into a world wide industry. We could learn a lot from the Finns. the Danes. and the Nonveyians .... 1 think there are things that we could make which are hi5 h quality which would alwavs have niche markets." Hammond. and M'Gonigle and Parfitt a I acknowledge that the value added businesses which presently exist in B.C. tend to pay lower wages than the capital intensive miIl jobs. M'Goniple and Parfitt contend that even if lower wages are paid to workers in value added businesses, more revenue per unit of wood remains in the local communitv in the form of wages paid to workers. They cite a study completed b y a government appointed comrnittee which found that in capital intensive sawmills, it took 500, 000 board feet of timber to create one job, which in turn resulted in $53,000 in total wages. The same arnount of wood created 4.5 full time jobs in a value added mil1 and resulted in a total of $160.000 in wages (M'Gonigle and Parfitt 1994. p. 84). The standard of living for working class people has declined throughout North America for the past two decades. In contrast, the salaries and other forrns of compensation paid to top level executives has dramatically increased (Sklar, 1998). Advocating refonns that will result in lower wages, albeit more jobs, may not appear to be the most socially 151 desirable solution. However. the high wages that many workers received in the post World War II period were only possible due to over-exploiting a resource and a lack of competition from other regions. In the 1990s. the resource is depleted and foreign competition has increased. The present high-wage, capital intensive production methods currently being employed in B.C.'sforest industry are not feasible over the long-term. Therefore. the choice appears io be between having a steadily declining number of people ernployed in capital intensive mills and logging operations or having a relatively stable nurnber of persons involved in silviculture. sustainable timber extraction. and value added rnanufacturing. Since the forests of B.C are publicly owned. and dlegedly dernocratically controlled, if sacritices in consumption levels of material gods are necessary. which it appears they are. then these sacrifices should first be made by those who receive a disproportionaie amount of the wealth. (Le., shareholders and management level employees) derived from exploiting Crown land. The Neo-Liberal Critique üBC's Dean of Forestry, Clark Binkley, asserts that one of the primary problem facing B.C.'s forest industry is that timber being extracted t'aster than forests are producing it. If current practices continue, then the provincial annual allowable cut (AAC) will likel y have to be reduced by approximately 24 percent. This in turn will result in significant job loss and an increase in social problems associated with dramatic increases in unernployment levels. The provincial pvernment will be less equipped to deal with these problerns due the drop in the AAC resulting in a projected increased budget deficit of $2 billion. Furthemore. rather than confining the adverse effects of loyging to a given area, the current Forest Practices Code results in a patchwork of small clearcuts. "This pattern of harvests will fragment the forest with predictable consequences for biological diversity . ..These landscape changes will tend to favour early successional species, while much of the contemporary public concem focuses on late successional species (e.g., the spotted owl)" (Binkley 1 997. p. 50). In order to presewe biodiversity, Binkley advocates placing "23 million ha of productive forest, 20 mm ha ofsavannahs and other vegetated land. and 20 million ha of "rocks and ice" (Binkley 1997. pp.49-50) off lirnits to timber capitalists. He does not nddress issues pertaining to other forms of resource extraction. eg.grazing cattle or mininp on Crown land. With the aim of avoiding a drastic decline in the .\AC. and ensuring rhat future yenerations will have a reliable source of commercially viable timber. Binklev advocates granting timber capitalists access to approsimately half (20 million hectares) of the "productive forest" areas in B.C.These areas would be clearcut and regenerated using intensive silvicultural technology . B inkley daims that the application of intensive silvicultural technology could increase future timber yields in a given area by as much as 400-500 percent (Vancouver SuMarch 13. 1 998. p. A)). Irnproved silvicultural technology-from bener inventory and yield information to sophisticated techniques of molecular yenetics- can sustain harvest levels on a smaller land base, freeins land to allocation of other uses. The power of this technology has not been extensively used in BC. but it has been in other parts of the world. For example, because of an aggressive hiyh technology plantation proyram. forest companies in New Zealand no longer log that country's native forests but instead. rely entirely on plantation forests (Binkley 1997, pp. 57-58). According to Binkley. under the current timber tenure system. timber capitalists have no incentives to regenerate fibre on areas the); have logpd on Crown land, due to the fact they do not own the land. He assens that sivins private corporations private propeny rights on public lands is the best way to ensure that the necessary investments will be made in the application of silvicultural technology w hich would ensure that second nature is able to reproduce itself in a manner which ensures the continued profitabil itv of conducting industrial forestry in B.C. He supports his argument by using the following analogy of a tenant painting a rented house: In BC. discussions of forest tenures frequentiy use the analogy of owning ri house outriyht (private land) versus renting it (tree farm licences or forest licences): if you lease a house to people. you hardly expect thern to paint it (invest in silviculture). and if you require them to do so (free to grow requirements). thry ivill probably use the cheapest paint possible To entend this analogy. FRBC offers to buy paint but provides no incentive to apply it carefully (to implrment the most efficient silvicultural investrnents) (Binkley 1997. p. 53). Binkley yoes on to state that there is "ample empirical evidence- both from elsewhere in the world and now from BC- that strengthened property rights lead to higher investrnents in forest management." despite his claim that there is "ample empirical evidence" to support his position, the only empirical evidence cited by Binkley is a PhD dissertation from the Faculty of Forestry Depanment at UBC. This dissertation found that the "strength of property rights", for different tenure agreements on Crown land, was positively correlated with silvicultural investments (Z hany, 1994). In regard to Binkley's prediction that timber yields on a given piece of land could be increased by as much as fivefold, Barrie Philips. manager of the forest productivity research branch for B.C.'s Ministry of Forests (MoF), stated that he had seen evidence that increased yields of 30-40 percent are possible. However, as yet there was no evidence that increased yields of 400-500 percent are possible (Vancouver Sun, March 13, 1998, p. .A 3). Determining whether or not 500 percent timber yields are possible, or if clearcutting is preferable to paftial cutting, is beyond the scope of this dissertation and my own expertise. However. a major weakness in Binkley's argument is his assertion that granting corporations private property rights on public land will provide the necessarv incentives for timber capitalists to engage in intensive silvicultural practices. It seems reasonable to believe that on eucalyptus plantations in Brazil and elsewhere. where a cornrnercially viable tree can be grown in as little as seven years, or in the southern L1.S where radiata pine cmbe hanested in 12- 30 yrars. timber capitalists would take the necessarv nieasures to ensure ihat they receive the fastest possible return on their investments. However. in 5.C conimerciallv viable timber tvpically takes between 100 and 200 years to grow. There are a few esceptions to this general rule. About 1 O percent of the forested land has unusually fertile soi l in wliich pulp wood can be grown in a 60-80 year period (Hammond 1992. p. 8 1 ). As mentioned above, MacMillan-Bloedel has planted deciduous trees on some of the increasingly scarce agricultural land in B.C. (about 3 percent of the total land base) which can be harvested in a relatively short period of time. The point is, in most cases. a corporation would have to wait approximately 100 years before it saw a return on its investment. Binkley has not provided any evidence which susgests that a corporation would be williny to make an investment which would not result in a return duriny the lifetimes of its shareholders. Moreover. in British Columbia. logying on private land has often resulted in "poor, unreyulated forestry practices" (Burda Curran, Gale, and M'Gonigle, 1997) and large tracts of privately owned land on Vancouver Island have often been sold to real estate developers after they were logged. Throughout this century, tirn ber corn panies have logged the original forest growth without adequately replenishing its fibre producing potential. This was done because it was more profitable to penetrate deeper into the hinterlands to extract tirnber which did not require investments from anyone to produce and the state was willing to seIl it at beloiv market value. Once the original forests are gone. it will be more profitable for timber capitalists to move on to other rrgions which already have commercially viable timber. or to invest in tree plantations in areas where fibre can be rapidly grown and labour is cheaper. ,As discussed above, tim ber corporations are already making investments in such regions. Like some farmers and ranchers in BC,,if timber capitalists had private propenv rights on forested land, they rnav also tÏnd that selling the land to real estate developers provides a faster retum on their investments than livestock, agriculture. or silviculture. Therefore, the only way that the state can ensure that the necessary investments are made in silviculture is to collect the rnoney directly from the private interests who are granted access to public land. This would enable the state to either establish tree plantations in previously forested areas or hire private contractors to do so. Reduced Work Week Due to improvements in infrastructure and the increased organic composition of capital, the production of forest products and many other commodities has become much less labour intensive in recent years and production will likely continue to become more efficient. Value added manufacturing has the potential to create more forest sector employment; however, it is not likely to be a panacea for B.C.'s unemployment probiem. Although Jeremy 156 Rifkin (Rifiin, 1995) critique of capitalist over-production does not focus specifically on B.C., many of his arguments can be readily applied to B.C.'s forest industry Ritliin argues that biotechnology and efficiency enhancing technology wil 1 result in high levels of unemployment throughout the world. which in turn will result in capitalist over-production. Reduçing the iiourr worked per düy or per week. is one of the oidest tactics employed by labour to reduce capitalist exploitation (e.g.,Zinn 1995. pp. 206-217). Among other reforms such as increasing ernployment through the private. nonprofit sector. Ritlin advocates shoneniny the work week as a rnrans of increasing rmployment leïels The Communications. Enersy, and Paper Workers Lfnion (CEP) has successfu 1 IV bargainrd for shoner work hours in sorne of the workpl~esit represents. The CEP proniotes a reduction in the work week as a means of creüting more emplovment and enhancing the quality of life of working class families tlirough creating more leisure tirne (CEP. 1997). As will be discussed in chapter six, the PPWC has also sought to reduce the number of hours worked per week. Many of the above proposais cal1 for a reduction in both the exploitation of labour and nature. As will be discussed in later chapters. the labour movement and the environmental movement have incorporated elements of sorne of these critiques into their own platforms. Thus, capital's dual exploitation of labour and nature has led to numerous critiques of the forest industry, which in turn. have provided social actors with alternative visions of how to utilire land and labour. The next two chapters focus on how Greenpeace and the Pulp, Paper. and Woodworkers of Canada have responded to the present economic and ecological crises. CHAPTER SIX MUTATION WITHCN THE ENVIRONMENTAL MOVEMENT "Une corpurate erecutive in their office con destroy more forests by the struke of u pen than any forest worker rvulû ever (Io in a /i/e tirne. And I think that it iv impt~rt~ntthnt peuple in the en virvnniental mu vernent ctl~vt~ysrember thnt. Thut's nul ivhu uur fihi is with. " Treporah l3er1nm. Greenperr ce Internatiund (au thor interview) As discussed in previous chapters, as capital's exploitation of forest sector workers has increased. so has capital's exploitation of forest rco-systems. O'Connor contends that addressing one form of exploitation requires addressing the other Moreover, capi ta1 's exploitation of its production conditions increases public awareness of environmental and labour issues and rnobilizes social movements. Thus, capital itself has the potential to act as "a kind of a marriape broker" (O'Connor, 1991 C) between the labour movernent and the environmental movement. O'Connor does not claim that a labour-environmentalist alliance is historically inevitable; however, it is a possibility which is made more likely by the accelerated rate at which capitalists are exploiting and/or destroying external nature and workers. O'Connor's theoty hiplies that social movements alter their agendas and tactics in order to address the emerginy social problems created by capital's dual exploitation of labour and nature. However, he does not explicitly state why there is some potential for the various institutions which challenge capital's exploitation of its production conditions to reform their policies and/or form alliances. Alain Touraine (Touraine, 1 988) views social movements as being similar to species which tend to mutate in order to adapt to changing environments. However, unlike species which randomly produce offspring that have physical characteristics which may or may not contribute to the survival of the species. social actors consciously assess their social environments and seek to effect change. Touraine contends that rnost actors in a given society hold similar cultural orientations. Therefore. social struggles seldom penain to contlicts re~ardingfundamental values. the conflict is typically over what social forms various institutions in society should take. In regard to the conflict between capital and labour. Touraine maintains that: ...the labor movernent is a central actor of industrial society since it affirms that machines und the organization of labor are good but only insotàr as they serve al1 the workers and population at large. Entrepreneurs are also central actors because they hold an analogous discourse: our activity and our profits are good because they develop industry and raise everyone's standard of living. Thus the conflict between industrialists and workers lies at the center of industrial society both camps believe in industry and have the same cultural orientations. but thev stniggle to give industrial cultural widelv divergent social forms (Touraine 1988. p. 9). As will be detailed here and in chapter seven. the agendas and tactics of both the labour movernent and the environmental movement have mutated io adapt to changing social circumstances. As is consistent with Touraine's theory, for the most pan, social actors involved in the labour movement and the environmental movement hold cultural values which are similar to the values held by their capitalist adversaries. For instance. neither Greenpeace nor the PPWC question the legitimacy of capitalism. However. as will be discussed in the next two chapters, social acton in both organizations have raised doubts regarding the ability of "experts" employed by capital and the state to manage publicly owned forests in a manner which ensures lony-term economic and ecoloyical stability. Moreover, as will be discussed in chapter seven, there is some evidence that social actors involved in the labour movement are questioning one of the cornerstones of the dominant 159 ideology: the assumption that ever increasing levels of production and consumption are both possible and desirable. In the case of Greenpeace and the Pulp. Paper, and Woodworkers of Canada (PPWC), their histories. primary goals. membership composition. and structure do not appear to indicate that these two organizations would develop policies which overlap to a certain degree or that the above orsanizations would have an interest or a desire to engage in cooperative efforts. The former is an undemocratic organization primarily composed of middle-class individuals. Funhermore. Greenpeace has a history of intedering with its own worker's attempts to organize and engage in collective bargaining. The latter is n fiercelv democratic. independent Canadian union whose primary purpose is to promote worker safetv and the economic welfare of its membership; protecting external nature is one of the union's seconda- concerns. It will be argued that the accelerated Pace at which capital has exploited forests and forest sector workers over the past two decades resulted in both Greenpeace and the PPWC adopting policies and tactics desiyned to address both forms of exploitation. This. in turn. created the opportunity for cooperative action between these two institutions. The Environmental Movement W ith the aim of locatin~Greenpeace's ideological position within the environmental movement, we will briefly discuss the some of the tactics and ideologies of contemporary environmentalists. There are wide variety of organizations, with differing political ideologies and agendas, which purpon to be "environmental groups" (Pepper. 1996; Scott, 1990). As discussed in chapter four, even members of the corporate front-group Share B.C. daim to be "real environmentalists." Thus, it is not possible to characterize the environmental movement as a whole as being "left-wing", "right-wing", or '.moderate." Some environmental oqanizations maintain very close ties with resource extraction industries. For instance, the Nature Conservancy accepts money from private corporations and avoids confrontation with governments and business interests by purchasing endanpered habitats rather than opposing capitalkt exploitation of public and private land. Moreover. the Nature Conservancy has an anthropocentric. utilitarian view of non-human nature (Luke. 1995). In British Columbia. where over ninety-five percent of the commerciallv viable timber is located on public land, an environmental organization which limits its tactics to private land acquisition does not pose a major threat to corporatr profits bloreover. cooperating with such an organization may be seen as a wise investment of corporate public relations dollars. Via the Forest Alliance. there is a very close relationship between the Nature Conservancy of Canada and timber capitalists. The Nature Conservancy of Canada donates money to the B.C. Forest Alliance (http://www.forest.orp) and vice versa. In 1996 the Forest Alliance ayreed to donate $2 million over a five year period to the Nature Conservancy of Canada to help with their efforts to protect the wintering habitat of bald eagles at Brackendale. According to Forest Alliance Chairman Jack Munro, the Nature Conservancy's tactics and soals made it a "natural partner" for the Forest Alliance (Munro 1996, p. 1). Where most environmental groups lobby govemment to preserve public land and resources at the expense of other interests, the Nature Conservancy either buys land outright or trades for development rights. Rather than workiny against industry, the Nature Conservancy bui lds partnerships that com bine conservation wi th economic development. The 'Eagles of Brackendale' is a prime example. By working with the Forest Alliance and other donors. the Nature Conservancy intends to purchase timber rights from small land-owners in the Squamish Valley (Munro 1996, p. 2). The Nature Conservancv is an example of an environmental orgnization which does not challenge capital's exploitation of nature or labour. External nature is a commodity which can be disposed of by property owners in any wny that they see fit. The Nature Conservancy's membrrship is rncouraged to col lectivel y "invest" (Luke. 1995) in land in order to give them legitimate control of pans of endangered eco-systems. This enables the organization to preserve relativel y smal l parcels of land without challenging property rights or standing in the way of "progress." There are other smaller environmental groups which. although their goals are relatively modest. often directly challenge capital's exploitation of nature and/or labour. .At the local level in Canada and elsewhere. there are many "single issue" environmental groups which forrn to protest particuiar endeavours engagd in by either capital or the state such as road construction, nuclear power plant construction, and toxic waste dumping etc. These groups are often composed of a broad cross-section of the local population. Typically. tbey are not concerned with effecting change in the larger society and are held together by the immediate goal of protecting the local environment (Scott. 1990). While there are wide variety of ideologies among those individuals and organizations which consider themselves to be pan of the environmental movement, David Pepper contends that, "there is a core of beliefs common to most greens-especially radical rather than reformist greens (those who believe that fundamental social change is necessary to create a proper, sustainable. environmentally sustainable society)" (Pepper 1996, p. 10). According to Pepper. many radical environmentalists share the following beliefs: The planet's resources are finite and/or heing exploited at an unsustainable rate. ..\ sustainable economy presupposes radical economic reforms as well as a twly democratic form of government. as opposed to the current structure of the liberal democratic state. hloreovrr. Pepper maintains that most radical "greens" question Western notions of "progress" and believe that values such as "consumerism" are inherently detrimental to the environment. hlany of the radical theorists discussed in chapter two (tg..Bookchin. 1993; Dalv and Herman 1994; Naess 1973. O'Connor. 1988; Shiva. 1993) rither implicitly or rxplicitly accept these bel iefs. Some grassroots environmental activists. e.y.,the late Judi Bari. have incorporated some of the propositions made by radical iheorists. eg.. Karl Man and Arne Naess. into their agendas: The capitalist system is in direct contlict with the natural iaws of biocentrism. Capitalism. first of all. is based on the principal of private propeny-of certain humans "owning" the eanh for the purpose of enploiting it for profit. At an earlier stase. capitalists even believed that they could own other humans. But just as slavery has been discredited in the mores of today 's world view, so do the principles of biocentrism discredit the concept that humans can own the earth (Bari 1997, p. 145). Greenpeace is clearly not a "radical" environmental organization. While it is willing to challenge the right of capital to exploit nature on both public and private land, its goals are more reformist than radical. Greenpeace is asainst the use of technology which endangers the weil-being of individual species (including humans) and/or eco-systems. The various 163 issues the organization is concerned with and tactics it employs have often resulted in direct confrontations with both capital and the state. However. througbout its history, it has engaged in a series of "single issue" environmental campaigns. The group has never focused on chanying political or economic structures. Moreover. in recent years it has claimed to be strictly an "environmental" organization, and has been very liesitant to ensage in anv actions which might be considered "political issues." There are many environmental orgnizations currently addressing the ecological problems related to timber production and manufacturing in B.C..e.g., the Western Canada Wilderness Cornmittee. the Sierra Club, the Forest Action Nrtwork. and the Valhalla Society. None of the above orgnizations can be characterized as strictlv "preservationist" groups. Land preservation is pan of their agenda. but they also advocate continuing losging and milling, albeit, on a srnaller scale and in a manner which they consider to be economically and ecologically sustainable. Greenpeace's history and the specific history of its B.C. forest campaign. will be presented in some detail due to its practice of not only criticizing timber corporations for utiliziny technology in ways that destroy forests but for utilizing technology in ways that result in high levels of unemployment among forest sector workers. Historically preservation of wilderness areas has not been a major aspect of Greenpeace's environmental campaigns. Unlike some environmental groups such as the Nature Conservancy, which avoid confrontations with capital and the state and accept donations from private corporations, Greenpeace has often been willin~to engage in direct confrontations with corporations and pvemments. Furthemore, according to Jeanne Moffat, Executive Director of Greenpeace Canada. "Greenpeace Canada takes no money from corporations and pvernments" (The Vancouver Sun September 12. 1997, p. A II).As will be discussed below, historically the organization has not dealt with issues pertaining to social class. Furthermore, Greenpeace Canada attrmpted to quash its own workers attempt to form a union (Canad ian Dimension Auyust-September t 99-1) However. in spite of its own labour policies, and its tendency CO ignore the class dimensions of social problems like war and environniental depradation. Greenpeace's forest cainpaign in BC. has addressed capital 's exploitation of labour and has even sought out alliances with the labour movcment. Thus. Greenpeace's B.C. t'orestrv campaign is an interesting case study in regard to the possibilities t'or a labour-environmentalist alliance. The Genesis of Greenpeace According to the Greenpeêce (Brown and May. 199 I ), a publication which is distributed by that organization. Greenpeace began as an anti-nuclear protest group. The Viet Nam War also appears to have been a major factor in rnotivating some of the original members of Greenpeace to start a new social movement which addressed issues that were either neglected or ignored by traditional environmental organizations. Jim Bohlen. an American World War 11 veteran had personally witnessed the horrors of atomic warfare by visitiny sites where the U.S. had dropped atomic bornbs on Japan. When his stepson became eliyible for the draft in 1966, Bohlen left his job in the U.S. and moved to Vancouver. In 1967, Bohlen met Dorothy and Irving Stowe at a protest march ayainst the Viet Nam War. Irving Stowe, an American expatriate and Yale educated attorney, had left the United States in 196 1 with his wife and children. They rnoved to New Zealand in hopes of increasing their chances of survival in the event of a nuclear war. Jim BohIen had been active in the Canadian branch of the Sierra Club. He became frustrated with that organization's refusal to become involved in the issue of nuclear weapons testing. This prompted Bohlen. Stowe. and Paul Cote. who was a law student ai the time. to form the "Don't Make a Wave Committee" in 1970. The organization later became Greenpeace. Stowe. a Quaker, was instrumental in shaping the tactics ernployed by the fledgl ing oryanization. which included non-violent resistiince and the Quaker practice of "bearine- witness" to social in.iustices. The purpose of the "Don 't hlake a Wave Commitree" was to "bear witness" to a scheduled nuclear bomb test on Arnchitka Island. tvhich is one of the Aleutian Islands off the Coast of Alaska. by sailing a ship in to the testiny zone. Accordin!: to an article which appeared in The Natioq (October 6. 1997), in addition to having the goal of stopping a nuclear explosion. the members of the îïrst Greenpeace campaiyn also intended to Save the jobs of the people who depended on the fisheries located within range of the test site. It is interesting that this aspect of the campaign was not considered important enough to include in Greenpeace's official history of i tself. The contemporary leadership of Greenpeace assens that. "Greenpeace is concemed only to protect the environment" (Greenpeace Annual Report 1992-9)). Patrick Moore, then a graduate student at University of British Columbia. and Robert Hunter. who was then a columnist for The Vancouver Sul also participated in what would be Greenpeace's very first campaign. Prior to the voyage, the "Don't Make a Wave Committee" changed its narne to "Greenpeace". which was intended to convey the organization's concem with issues related to "peace" and "ecology." Greenpeace's fint logo contained both the symbols for peace and ecology. On the voyage to Amchitka the crew stopped in a Kwakiutl First Nation's village. The crew members were made honorary tribal brothers, which "strengthened the "vague affinity" that rnost of the crew felt with the Indians" (Brown and May 199 1. pp. 1-9). Other individuals who would later be instrumental in shapins Greenpeace, e.g..Paul Watson. aka "Grev Wolf Clear Water" and Walrus Oakenbough. were adopted warriors of the Ogala Sious (Brown and Mav 199 1. p. 35). Robert Hunter brought a book of Native American legends with him on the voyage. One of the legends that particularly inspired the crew was a Cree prophecy that predicted that there would corne a time when hurnans were on the verge of destroving themselves and al1 other species. Just before it was too late. the lndian would regain his spirit and teach the white man reverence for the eanh. banding together with him to become Warriors of the Rainbow"'. . . . Hunter passed around his copy of the book. "Predictably," he later wrote. the older men were less impressed than the youngsters. But rainbows tlid appear several times the following day and it ciid seem sornehow mayical as we chugged throuyh the mare of inlets and channels. sounds and bays ( Hunter quoted in. Brown and May 199 1, p. l3), Thus. Greenpeace was formed by middle-class activists due to the failure of traditional environmental groups to address a new social problem created by a new technology. Since its beginning, its critique of society has been primarily limited to protesting certain forms of technology and certain applications of technology. It does not address other social issues like corporate domination of the state, nor the unsustainable ' This same lepnd later inspired the name of Greenpeace's ship, "The Rainbow Warrior" which was blown up by French commandos in 1985 in an attempt to subven Greenpeace's anti- nuclear campaign. 167 nature of an economic system that requires perpetual growth and ever increasing amounts of natural resources . In their stud y of Greenpeace International. E yerman and Jam ison O bserved that, "As its name implies. however. Greenpeace has its own conception of the problem that is to be alleviated by direct action War and environmental destruction arise from the same unanalysed cause; the important thing is not to understand why destruction occurs. but to slow it down reverse the trends. give people the hope that personal cornmitment can make a difference" (Eyerman and Jarnison 1989. p. 1 10). Greenpeace's focus on the negative effects of certain applications and forms of teclinology, often leads to a shallow analysis of the causes of war and other social problems. Furthermore. Greenpeace has evolved into an organization that daims to "take no political stance" (Greenpeace Annual Report 1997-93). Of course. issues pertaining to how humans should interact with external nature or whether or not violence is a justifiable means of settling a conflict are inherently political, as the state is the only institution which may declare war, and as has already been discussed. the state regulates capital's access to nature. Its desire to appear "non-political" has transformed Greenpeace into a cautious. conservative organization. In reference to taking a position on the Persian Gulf War. Karen Mahon, a Greenpeace ernployee who works on the Canadian forest campaign recounted. "There was a big debate in Greenpeace about what to do and whether we should take a position or not. Unbelievable! And to our credit Iwould Say, eventually we did" (Mahon. author interview, December 3, 19%). However, Greenpeace's analysis of the war was both cautious and superficial. The position the organization took was that the reliance of industrialized nations on petroleum products led to the Persian Gulf War. Ego, if industrialized nations decreased their dependence on fossil fuels by developing solar and wind technology. future wars li ke the Persian Gulf would not occur. Such an analvsis does not explore issues related to the distribution of economic and political power. like capital's influence over the state or the disproportionate number of lower class individuals who. due to the unequal distribution of wealth, occupy lower rankiny positions in the military hierarchv. which. in turn. increases the likelihood that thev will be killed in combat. Nor does it explore. as some authors have alleged (e.g.. Berman and O'Connor. 1996). the role that the petroleuni industrv has played in suppressin-, the development of sustainable. alternative energv sources like solar power For a brief time aAer the Amchitka proiest. Greenpeace's primarv focus remained on issues related to nuclear weapons such as the French governrnent's above ground testing of nuclear weapons on islands in the South Pacific. In the mid 1970s, David McTaggan, a former ski resort owner and real estate developer. joined Greenpeace and became instrumental in shaping the organization's development. McTaggan and other Greenpeace members, gained international attention by sailing into an area in the South Pacific where the French government had scheduled an above ground nuclear weapons test. Their small sailing vessel was rammed by a French military ship and was forced to leave the area in order to receive repairs. On another occasion, French commandos boarded a Greenpeace vessel and assaulted McTagyan and other crew members. McTaggart was beaten so severelv that he had to be hospitalized and nearly lost an eye (Brown and May 199 1, pp. 20-30). From Grassroots to Multi-National NGO Toward the late 1970s, the organization gradually expanded its field of concern into other areas such protecting marine mammals and issues related to toxic waste. Branch offices beyan to appear in the U.S.and in Europe. In 1976, a board of directors was established in Vancouver. with Robert Hunter as president and Patrick Moore as one of the vice-presidents. There were manv internai power struggles and disputes over which campaigns Greenpeace would engage in and what tactics were appropriate to eniploy In 1977. Paul Watson was dismissed t'rom Greenpeace after hr disarmed a seal hunter who was wielding a club. Accordhg to Watson. his action threatened the organizations desire for "corporaie growth" and that Greenpeace had been "intiltrated by people who were into the legislative aspects of the organ ization. not activists" (Watson quotrd in canadian Dimension August-September 1994. pp 9- 10). As rnentioned above. Watson went on to found his own organization, the Sea Shepard Conservation Society. In that same year. Robert Hunter resigned as president of Greenpeace and was replaced by Patrick Moore. hleanwhile David McTaggart was setting up Greenpeace offices in Europe. After Hunter resigned. Moore attempted to set up an international board of directors For Greenpeace, with himself as the board's chairman However. the Vancouver branch of Greenpeace was indebt and was engaged in a legal battle with the San Francisco branch of the oryaniration over what Moore considered a violation of trademark agreements. The San Francisco branch in turn brought a law suit against the Vancouver branch For slander. Prior to the case going to court, David McTaygart. who had been organizing Greenpeace branches in Europe, stepped in and used money from the European branches to pay off the Vancouver office's debts. Both the Vancouver and San Francisco branches agreed to halt al1 legal actions against one another. It was agreed that the head office for Greenpeace lntemational would be located in the Netherlands and that David McTaggart would be the organization's CE0 and chairman (Brown and May 199 1, p. 65-68). As mentioned in chapter the. Patrick Moore would eventually leave Greenpeace to pursue a career as a public relations representative for timber corporations. U nder McTaggart's leadership. Greenpeace Internat ional developed a hierarchy sirnilar to a multi-national corporation. Currently. the oganization is composed ofa iïve person board of directors which in turn answers to representatives from the organization's 23 national offices klany countries also have regional offices. For instance. Greenpeace Canada is located in Toronto, with regional offices in Vancouver and Montreal According to Eyerman and Jan~ison.who conducted interviews with Greenpeace emplovees in Holland. Sweden, and Denmark: The organization is composed of these "offices" and, when it is decided that Greenpeace should eapand its operations into a new country or region, an otlke is opened and staff hired in much the same manner as any business organization. Greenpeace has a policy of not usins too many "volunteers" in their office work and especially not in key positions. Two ideas lie behind this. Greenpeace builds on the knowledge and skills of trained professionals in business, advertking, media and so on. "Activist" volunteers most often do not possess such skills. which must be sought elsewhere. Secondly, Greenpeace is extremely carefui about the politics of those who work in their offices. Everyone who works there, and most especially the paid staff, is carefully screened regarding their political views as well as their past activities. The reason given is that in order to be most effective in reaching its tarpet groups- "the silent majority" which composes public opinion in Western democracies, and national political and business leaders who run the govemments and corporations ihey wish to influence and affect they must rernain entirely non-partisan and free from outside influences. Their message is moral and economic, not "political" in the modern sense of being bound to a party or an ideology (Eyerman and Jamison 1989, p. 105). An article in Canadian Dimension (August-September 1994, p. 9), observed that, "the organization is not. and never has been, an anti-capitalist. left wing, democratic organization .... Greenpeacers would Say they were "Not Left or Right but Green." Greenpeace avoids "political" issues in order to appeal to the widest possible segment of the global population. The membership is passive in that it does not have any formai control over which carnpaigns Greenpeace engages in or the tactics that it employs. Having a large membership base not only increases the funds at Greenpeace's disposal. it also increases the ability of the organization to effect change by pressuring government ofticials and corporations (Eyerman and Jamison 1989, p. 108) Thus. in the rninds of Greenpeace International's leadership. the best way to effrct change is through having ii large membership. Directly taking on issues penaining to social class or other "political" issues could potentially reduce its membership and thus reduce its ability to effect social change. Throughout the 1980s. Greenpeace International continued to grow. In 1985. the licii~howWorrior, a Greenpeace ship, was sunk in a New Zealand harbour as a result of a bomb exploding which was planted by agents of the French governrnent. Several crew members were on board when the bomb detonated. Fernando Pereira. a photographer working with Greenpeace. drowned as a result of the explosion. The French were attempting to stop Greenpeace from protesting an above yround nuclear explosion in the South Pacific (Brown and May 199 1, pp. 107- 127). After this incident Greenpeace's membenhip rapidly increased throughout the world. By the late 1988. Greenpeace Canada collected $2.1 million in revenues (- D~nsionAugust-September 1994. p. 10). By the late 1980s. Greenpeace had made the transition from a small, single issue group, formed by and run by activists, to a highly organized and efficient nongovemmenial 172 orçanization mn by professional managers who do not necessarily have any background as social activists. For instance, Thi Io Bode, the current CE0 of Greenpeace International is a professional manager recruited from the private business sector. Although Dave McTagyan. the former CE0 of Greenpeace International, was a private entrepreneur. he rose through the ranks of Greenpeace after sailing into a French nuclear test zone and continuing to face up to the French governrnent even after being personally beaten by French commandos. Jeanne Moffat. the current executive director of Greenpeace Canada. had no experience as an environmental activisi prior to becoming involved with Greenpeace. According to an article in Canadian Dimension (Canadian Dimension .August-Seprember. I 994) Moffat nllegcidl y threatened to suspend a Greenpeace rmployee for rngaging in a direct action ügainst oil spills rather than being at the Toronto ot'fice available to answer telephone calls. Bmce Livesey, the author of the article commented: "While one envisions environmental activists as scruffy, ineverent, sandal wearing youths, Moffat is the prim and proper picture of middle aged propriety. She has a rather patronizing, schoolrnarmish personality . , Indeed, ir's liard to envision Moffat hanging her hide out of a Zodiac dinghv. dodging whaler's harpoons" (wianDima August-September 1994). Greenpeace's Labour Policies Greenpeace has also been criticized by other left-wing journais for creating a class of employees, cg., the canvassers who solicit funds from door to door in major Nonh American cities, who work for very low wages and have no voice in shaping either Greenpeace's carnpaigns or its intemal labour policies. .4ccording to Alexander Cockburn: They [the canvassers] tmiy were, in Paul Watson's bitter gibe, the Avon ladies of the environmental movement. A canvasser with no input easily became a canvasser with cynicism and temptation. all too often unresisted. to steal the money and blow it on cocaine. as happened in cities such as Seattle (The Nation 0ctober 16. 1997, p. 9). Greenpeace Canada's resistance to unions also evoked criticism froni the left-wing press. In December 1992. Toronto employees formed a union called the Greenpeace Toronto Staff Association. h few months later, Stan Gray and Gord Perks. two Greenpeace employees. complained to the Toronto media that Greenpeace ivas laving off emplovees who had been active in organizing the union. Shonly üftenvards. both men were fired One vear later. Jeanne Moffat. Greenpeace Canada's Executive Director spoke ai a Canadian Labour Congress (CLC) conference. .A former Greenpeace canvasser who was attending the conference berated Moffat for Greenpeace's anti-labour policies. Another member of the audience told Moffat, "This is the House of Labour and ive are not nterested in working with you" (Çêaad ian Dimui August-September 1994, p. 7). Greenpeace's Forest Campaign in B.C8 Greenpeace has successfully brought many important issues to the international community's attention (e.y.. nuclear testing, the slaughter of whales. the destruction of old growth forests, and the dangers of industrial toxins). Funhermore, it remains one of the few organizations that is willing to engage in direct confrontations with rnulti-national corporations and governments. In B.C., it has played a major role in giving the lie to claims made by the government and industry regarding B.C.'s "world class" forestry standards. Although the top executives of Greenpeace, e.g.. Thilo Bode, are paid quite well, the campaiyners in many local oftices in Nonh America receive modest salaries relative to their counterparts in the PPWC.' Like any profession (e.g.. teaching, academia, the priesthood). there are likely some amoral individuals who become involved with environmental NGOs for self-serving reasons. However. the profession also attracts people who are wiliing to forgo lucrative careecs in order to tÏght for a cause in which they believe. Tzeporah Berman. who is currentl y ernployed bv Greenpeace international chose a career with environmental NGOs after personally witnessing the destruction of an area which she had lived in: I started being involved with forestrv issues in British Columbia by volunteering for the Western Canada Wilderness Cornmittee 1 volunteered in the Cürmanah Valley camp. building mils and cooking for the researchers.And 1 did that for two summers in a row ...In1992. 1 went up to an area that 1 had been living in the vear before and it had been clearcut. complrtely clearcut. So. the valley that 1 had been living in. where my tent was pitched for two months the year before was completely gone. there was a road blasted right through the waterfall It was the tirst time t'or me that I had ever had a personal experience with a place that 1 had lived in that had been completely destroyed. When that happened, 1 decided that I couldn't stay building trails and doing research anymore and 1 went up and joined the Friends on the blockades at Clayquot bridge in '97. At the time 1 had just applied for law school. It was a big decision. I decided not to so to law school and instead to 30 full time into environmental activism (Berman. author interview, March 20. 1 997). Some employees of NGOs likely enjoy the quasi-celebrity status that cornes with beiny a well known activist. However. other activists no doubt wish that they could be more anonymous. Many of the activists who were interviewed for this project (e.g.,Tzeporah Berman. loe Foy, Karen Mahon, Colleen McCrory). have had to live with repeated threats ? For instance. David Peerla who during his tenure with Greenpeace was completing his PhD, reported that his top salary while employed by the Vancouver branch of Greenpeace was $32,000. According to PPWC President Garry Worth, a skilled worker in a miIl makes approxirnately $65,000 annual ly. made against them and their families, have had bomb threats made to their private residences, Iiave been mn off the road by other vehicles, or have suffered indignities like being spat upon by counter-protestors. A person whose main concern was either persona1 recognition or material gain could pick many other careers which are less stressful and more financially rewarding. The positive aspects of Greenpeace and the activists that it ernploys are fairly well known. so they haven't been focused on here. What is more permane to this project is to esplore how an undemocratic oganizat ion, primarilv composed of middle-chss individuals. ihat attempts to avoid "political issues". and has a recent historv of interferhg with its own worker's attempts to organize, has had some success at tinding common goals with a tkrcely democratic. independent Canadian union whose raison d'etre is to promote the interests of its membership. The backgrounds and concerns of the individuals who wrre instrumental in shaping Greenpeace's forestry campaign in B.C.. played an important rote in creating a political asenda that enabled the Vancouver repional office to find some common ground with the PPWC. Michael M'Gonigle has been involved with Greenpeace since the 1970s. He helped found Greenpeace International and has served both as a board member of Greenpeace Canada and as chairperson of Greenpeace Canada. M'Gonigle holds a doctorate in law and political economy and is currently the Eco-Research Chair of the Faculty of Law and the School of Environmental Studies at the University of Victoria. M'Gonigle was very frank regarding Greenpeace's reluctance to address issues directly related to social class: Interviewer: After reading Forestopia one thing that seemed pretty apparent was that decreasing environmental degradation requires decreasing corporate exploitation of the workers. M'Gonigle: Oh, absolutely. This has been a verv long running battle l'ni sure it's still a long mnning battle within Greenpeace International. How much do we go hmheing ii "save the renls" type grmip to deccnstmctin; corporate capitalism. And cenainlv within Greenpeace International. a lot of this is just not acceptable. Because. it's going to allv Greenpeace with the L~ihoruf'wy iri lir~g/~irdWhich wouldn't be a bad thing now. but five years ago they would have been considered cornmunist or something. And it detinitelv wants to be oriented to appealing to the environmental middle class and taking the safe issues (M'Goniyle. author interview. Decernber 12. 1996). From the beginning, Greenpeace's forest canipaiyn in BC. hos hiid n \vider focus than just wildrrness preservation. The tocus has also been on engaging in material interchanges in a sustainable manner which nlso places more of the wealth generated from exploiting publicly owned resources. into the hands of forest sector workers and timber dependent communities. According to M'Gonigle: Greenpeace has never been a wilderness preservation organization It was not its mandate ..... lt has really been against destructive uses of power Thev're not your environmental group that is preservationist in the way that the Sierra Club is. 1 did not get the campaign going in B.C. as a wilderness preservation campaign. It was much more on the destructive effects of the large structures of power on kind of broad sustainability of forest eco-systems of communities ...1 think that is still the driving ethos of the people in the campaipn.. .(M'Gonigle, author interview, Decernber 12. 1996). David Peerla was hired to start Greenpeace's forest campaign in Canada. Peerla's socio-economic background, history of involvement with unions. and his academic background have given him a different perspective on the labour movement and the causes of social problems such as environmental degradation than the average Greenpeace campaigner. Peerla' s father is an auto-electric mechanic and his mother is a homemaker. 177 Prior to going to university. he worked as a delivery person for the same Company as his fathet-. Peerla was raised in a mining town outside of Sudbury. Ontario. Miners in the Sudbuiy area are facing problems similar to those faced by forest sector workers; due to the increased organic composition of capital. more resources are beiny extracted with fewer workers. While teaching at Lakehead University, he was both local secretary and national secretary of the Caniidian Union of Educational workers. Peerla left Lakehead University to pursue a PhD in sociology at the University of California at Santa Cruz. While at Santa Cniz. Peerla. along with Janies O'Connor and others. established the socialist-rcology journal. . . -. Nature. Socialisnl (CNS) After returninp to BK.. through his connections with CNS. Peerla became acquainted with Michael Lrbowitz. an economics professor at Simon Fraser University who was involved with the Green Caucus of the New Democratic Party (NDP).It was through these associations that Peerla became involved with Greenpeace. "1 was basically networked in via CNS. and the Green Caucus of the NDP, [in spring 19901 into Greenpeace" (Peerla. author interview. October 14, 1997). From the beyinning the focus of the forest campaign in B.C. had been broader than strictly wilderness preservation. According to Peerla: There were many wilderness campaigns yoing on in the B.C. Coast. 1 said, "Okay, how can we distinyuish ourselves from these wildemess campaigners who are just pure preservationists?" We can distinguish ourselves by focusin!: on "clean production." We won't say no production, which is essentially what wilderness is. It says you can't have any fibre for any production ... (Peerla. author interview, October 14, 1997). Peerla wrote a pamphlet, Down Ca- which established the pals for the forest campaign. The campaign basically targeted three problems in the industry: the unsustainab le annual allowable cut. over capacity of mills, and the concentration of cuttiny rights into the hands of a few corporations. The campaign sought to address these problems by calling for a reduction in the AAC (annual allowable cut). more widespread use of low impact timber extraction methods. i.e.. replacing clearcutting with selective logging, calling for a moratorium on new mills, and by calling for the cutting rights to beconie niore widely dispersed. Peerla credits M'Gonigle with being the driving force behind shaping the B.C forest campaign. Peerla did not engage in confrontations with rank-and-tile forest sector workrrs during his tenure with Greenpeace His focus was more on using market pressure to coerce B.C. based timber corporatioiis into clianping their practices. For instance. Peerla organized n tour of B.C.3coast and forests on a Greenpeace ship for European parliamentarians and scientists with the aim of bringing international pressure of the B.C. government and timber corporations to change their practices: My strategy of working the European markets had the advantage of never having to have a direct confrontation with workers. Because. 1 thought it was a false polarity. 1 would rather the confrontation be capital versus the environmental organization. capital and the state. Because of course the Canadian state panicked and sent various officiais on speaking tours and paid for academics to go over there, and subsidized al1 kinds of things .... In its most optimistic vision, in the tormuiation under the clean production guise, when you' re trying to make the whole production process transparent... . so that someone in Europe or anywhere else could .... look in through their paper product and imagine the production of that product was killing fish, killing workers, destroying the homelands of indigenous peoples. So, that they could look through the commodity and see that. That was the vision, the yrand vision (Peerla, author interview. October 14. 1997). Although Peerla avoided direct confrontations with forest sector workers, he did not perceive that there were many opportunities to form an alliances with labour unions, particularly the IWA. In those days. Jack Munro was the head of the union. Jack Munro had corne out against the preservation of the Carmanah. We talked about the Green caucus inside of the NDP.One of the tensions was the tensions of the IWA against those members of the Green caucus. So. there was no possibility of an alliance. from my perspective. from the conversations that I had, between the IWA and Greenpeace. In fact. Colleen McCrory had pointed out to me. and it was my own experience. that a lot of the IW.4 locals had been captured by the Share BC movement. And Colleen did a lot of work to show some connections between the Share and the American organizations going right to the Moonies ...the sort of neo-right agenda in the U.S..coming in to Canada through people like Patrick Armstrong and Share B.C. and eventually permeating these locals. So, in a certain sense. the IWA were not available as allies. Cenainly the pulp workers were available... ,.Assoon as the spectre of market pressure appeared. then...as soon as the pulp sales were lost. Fletcher Challenge lost a $5 million sale in Grrmanv. this continual connection to market pressure ran as a media story. thrn our alliance with the pulp workers was over But prior to that time. when it was purely a pulp and paper campaiyn. they had actions whrre the workers joinrd them in spraying effluent over the ice. things like that (Peerla. author interview October 14. 1997). Peerla left Greenpeace in 1992. He is critical of Greenpeace's current use of blockades prwenting loggers tiom going to work as he feels that it creates the perception that the conflict is between forest sector workers and environmentalists. Funhermore. he acknowledges that the current campaign workers have suggested alternatives to current practices, such as the eco-forestry site in Vernon. but that the campaign's current emphasis on wilderness presewation leads to conflicts between workers and environmentalists. According to Peerla: If a lot of capacity cornes down [due to wildemess presewation] obviously workers are ping to lose their jobs. So. you have a demand that leads right into a direct confrontation with the interests of labour ... You could Say that workers are confused. You could say that they have confused their need to have a job with a need io have a job cutting lumber. But, none the less, they have a need to have a job. So, unless you have some way to address that real need, you're always going to have this butting up of heads (Peerla. author interview, October i 4, 1997). Peerla was succeedrd by Karen Mahon. Tamara Stark and Tzeporah Berman were hired to work on Greenpeace's Canadian forest campaign shonly aftenvards. hlahon has an undergraduate degree from Queens University in biologv and psvchologv. After completin- her degree. she worked pan time as a canvasser for Greenpeace and was eventually hired as a staff mernber in the Executivr Director's office of Greenpeace Canada. Her parents are Scottish immigrants. Her mother is a bookkeeper and her fàther is a arpenter Both parents are staunch supporters of the NDP Karen niovrd to BC. to work on the forest campaign. Taniara Stark has a deyree in journalism and a BA. Both of her parents are now retired. Her father \vas a banker and an investment counseIlor Her motiier \vas a teaçher and a professor of education. Prior to working for Greenpeace. Stark was employed as a journalist and did some work witli Amnesty International. Tzeporah Berman's parents both b died when she was 1 5 years old. They owned an advertking specialties company Berman did her undergraduate work at the University of Toronto and completed a niaster's degree in environmental studies at York University. She came to work for Greenpeace after first working as a volunteer for the friends of Clayquot Sound. In 1993. Berman worked for the Friends of Clayquot Sound as a blockade coordinator. The Clayquot Valley is located on the West Coast of Vancouver Island. It contains some of the last unlogged temperate rainforests left in the world. In the early 1990s . Greenpeace joined the Friends of Clayquot Sound and other environmental groups in seaing up blockades to prevent Macmillan-Bloedel from logging the area. Once the blockade was closed, Greenpeace offered her a job coordinating an international cam paign to address the issues regarding Clayquot Sound. Berman currently works in Greenpeace International's San Francisco office but she continues to work on issues related to the Canadian forest campaign. Mahon and Stark work in the Vancouver regional office. These two women are responsible for Greenpeace's entire forest campaign in Canada. Mahon, Stark. and Berrnan al1 have different educational backgrounds and theoretical orientations than Peerla. Both Mahon and Berman expressed interest in eco-feminist theory Mahon cornes from a working class background and Stark and Berman have middle or perhaps upper-middle class origins. However. none of these activists harbour any illusions regarding "good corporate citizens". .. . .there may be circumstances where workers are treated well by a company. but overall, the mandate of a large corporation is not necessarily to protect its workers over the long term. They may choose to protect its workers in the short tenn because it rnakes them more productive. Because its mandate is to make money. But, its mandate is not to be a happy member of the community So, in the shon term, they rnay invest in training programs or have dav care or flexible work hours or whatever. But in the longer term. if its not in their best interest, and if they need to downsize, then they're goiny to do that (Stark. author interview, November 20, 1996). The Greenpeace campaiyn continued to address both the extraction and manufacturiny phases of production. In July 1994. Greenpeace activists hoisted a banner which read, "Log Exports = Job Exports", in front of a freighter carryiny raw log which were being transported outside of the province. Activists passed out literature to the crew of the freighter on value-added production and the negative ecological and economic impacts of 182 clearcutting (Greenpeace Press Releases. My 5. 1994).' The environmental organization also produced a pamphlet, wtFree: Just Did It endorsing a logging operation near Nelson, B.C. The logging operation was part of the pvernment's Small Business Forest Enterprise programme and was cenitied by the Silva Forest Foundation. which is Herb Hamrnond's forestry consulting business. The Greenpeace pamphlet addressed issues li ke the concentration of cutting rights on Crown land. the unsustainable .-\AC, the ecological impact of clearcutting, and the relatively low ratio of jobs per unit of timber extracted in B.C. Greenpeace endorsed selective logging on the grounds that it created more jobs per 1000 cubic metre of timber extracted (3-4 jobs per cuhic metre selective cutting vs. O5 jobs per cubic metre from clearcuttins). Tlir pamphlet also called for tenure reforrn which would. "give panicular weisht to the interests of indisenous communities and promote a rapid transition from volume based to value added businesses which can provide more jobs with less wood." Although reducing capital's exploitation of labour rernains an aspect of Greenpeace's Canadian forest campaign. the emphasis during the past several years has been on wilderness preservation. Ln 1993. Greenpeace joined the Friends of Clayquot Sound and other environmental yroups in forminy blockades to prevent the Clayquot Valley from being logged. The valley contains three of the six remaining unlogyed old prowth watersheds on Vancouver Island. The blockades resulted in the arrests of approximatel y 800 protestors (Rowell 1996, p. 198). Similar protests were later coordinated with the PPWC.These will be discussed in chapter 7. 183 Greenpeace's next major carnpaign action was in a section of B.C. which the group has dubbed, "The Great Bear Rainforest." The Great Bear Rainforest is a coastal temperate rainforest located on the Coast of B.C.3mainland. Ln addition to being the home of old growth dependent species and containing numerous salmon runs. this area also contains large carnivores and omnivores such as gray wolves. grizzly bear, and the Karmode. or "spirit bear" a white bear which is genetic variation of the black bear. The carnpaiyn primarily employed three tactics: forming blockades with the aim of shutting down the corporate headquarters of timber companies. forming blockades with the aim of preventing loggers from extractins timber from the areas in question. and encouraging European and U.S. businesses to boycott products from the tiniber corporations. e.g.. klacMillan-Bloedel and Interfor. which were clearcutting old growth forests. Blockades which were intended to prevent logying operations from entering the Great Bear Rainforest were set up in places like Roderick Island. The Roderick Island blockade was set up against Western Forest Products. Activists chained themselves io loyging equiprnent and hung a banner reading, "Protect the Great Bear Rainforest" (Greenpeace Press Releases. May 2 1. 1997). The forest was not the onlv site where blockades occurred. Ten days after the blockade against Western Forest Products (WFP)beyan in the forest. Greenpeace activists occupied the board room of Western Forest Products' head office in Vancouver. The protestors released a report to the press which detailed ninety-six separate acts of non- cornpliance with the Forest Practices Code over a twenty-three month period. The forest campaigners Save the following reasons for switching the blockade from the forests to WFP's corporate headquarters: Mahon stated that, "Our fight is not with the workers and not 18.1 with the courts, we have moved our fight to the belly of the beast- the Company is hell bent on destroying one of the world's last great rainforests for it's [sic] benetit." Berman added, "We successfully stopped clearcutting of tliis great rainforest for 10 solid days. by the company's estimate- that rneans we saved 10.000 rainforest trees. And now we have corne to the source of destruction. For the past 1 O davs Western has been using the workers and First Nations to fight their fight for them. we're here to confront the Company directIf (Greenpeace Press Releases. May 30. 1997) Activists were also arrested for sraging protests at Canadian embassies in Europe and in U S locations. such as Washington. D C . where activists were arrested after hanying a banner which read. "Canada's Clerrcut R;~inforest: We Won't Buy It" from the columns of the Canadian cmbassy (Greenpeace Press Releases. May 1 5, 1997 and May 2 1. 1997) In lune 1997. Greenpeace sent out 5.000 letters to European and U.S businesses encouragins them not to ptirchase products made from wood fibre rxtracted from B.C.'sold growth forests (The Vancouver Sun Iune 12. 1997. p. .-\ I. The Vancouver Sun June 2 1, 1997. p. A 20). These tactics resulted in an extreme backlash from industry. the IWA. the provincial gwernment. and the mainztream press. In Vancouver. IWA members surrounded a Greenpeace vessel with log booms. The blockade was intended to prevent a marine pilot from boardiny the vessel in order to guide the ship out of the harbour. IWA President Dave Haggard demanded that Greenpeace "cut a cheque" to the IWA to pay for the wages lost by workers as a result of the blockade (Greenpeace Press Releases. luly 4. 1997). Later that year, the IWA filed a lawsuit against the protestors for iost waps (The Provincg September 1 1, 1997, p. A 20). The Province, a tabloid which is pan of consen'ative media mogul, Conrad Black's empire. ran a fuII front page headline. '.Greenpeace: Wilt These People Wreck B.C. ? A special report on this sumrner's War in the Woods. It could cost 20.000 jobs here. And endangr our standard of living" (The Province June 1 5. 1 997). The Province article quoted Premier GIen Clark as saying. "lt's clear thiit what thev want to do is shut down the entire forest industry This goes right to the hean of whether or not there are goin- to be any jobs in B.C. in the next five years." In the fall of 1997. Benjamin Cüshore. a post-doctoral fellow in the Forest Economics and Policy Analysis Research Unit at UBC. and Steven Bernstein. a PhD candidate in Political Science at the University of Toronto. CO-authoredan op-rd article for the Globe and Mail on Greenpeace's "Great Bear Rninforest" campaipn (Globe and hlail October 22. 1997. p. .A 23). Cashore and Hoberg contended that. ". . , . . the usually media- savvy Greenpeace did not bring B.C. clearcutting to the attention of the press of Europe and the United States. Boycotts never materialized. police arrested few protestors, and even the Canadian media attention fiuled." They assened that the campaign "faltered" due to Greenpeace's failure to "make ties with domestic groups". the lack of the international community 's awareness and concern about B.C.3 forest practices. and a change in NDP leadership from Premier Mike Harcourt to Glen Clark. Unlike Harcourt. the NDP, ". ..under new Premier Glen Clark. it no longer wanted to be "pushed" into adding protection measures. Thus, when Greenpeace criticized the NDP in a report on the Forest Practices Code. Mr. Clark referred to the organization as the "enemies of British Columbia.'? At the time of Cashore and Bernstein's op-ed piece. there were no significant boycotts of B.C. forest products. However, in April 1997, both U.S. and European 186 companies, e-g., Xerox, 3M. Union Carbide, and Bristol Myers, informed Western Forest Products and International Forest Products that they would no longer be willing to purchase products made from old growth timber (The Financial Post April 4. 1998. p. 12). Later that month, Union Carbide cancelled a contract with Western Forest Prodiicts (Times Colonist April 19. 1998. p. A 4). Most recently. MacMillan-Bloedel (klB) announced that it was seriously considering switching from clearcutting to selective cutting in old growth forests. According to Tom Stephens. CE0 of Macmillan-Blordel stated. "We are hearing more and more from our customers that they and their custoniers do not want wood from oid gowvth clearcuts" (Vancouver Sun April 24. 1998. p. .A I ) Both Greenpeace and the Sierra Club responded positively to MB's announcement (Victoria Times Colonist Aprii 24. 1998. p. .A I ). The day after MB's announcemeni. Fred Lowenberger. Senior Vice-President of Interfor stated. "If MacMillan-Bloedel successfully stops clearcutting, then we will be risht behind them" (Victoria Times Colod April 25. 19%. p. A 1 ) IWA President. Dave Haggard criticized MacMillan-Bloedel for responding to pressure from environmental groups like Greenpeace. MacMil lan-Bloedel later announced plans to "phase out" clearcutt ing in old growth forests (Vauouver Sun lanuary 28, 1999, p. F 4). Thus, Cashore and Berstein's statement that significant boycotts did not emerge was premature. However, Greenpeace's campaign can only be considered one factor among many which created the possib ility for timber capitalists like Macmillan-Bloedel and Interfor to consider adopting less profitable timber extraction methods, e.g.,panial cutting, and for capitals which purchase massive amounts of paper to consider alternative sources of fibre. As discussed in chapter three, during the past two decades, new sources of fibre for paper and construction grade lumber have become available from tree plantations. which specialize in fast-growing tree species. located in places like the U.S.southeast. Latin hmerica, and Europe. The global supply of pulp fibre is greater than the global demand. This may also be the case for construction grade lumber In an interview on the CBC radio programme. " Almanac". Vancouver based timber broker Steve Coughman asserted: For some reason, some people think that we're going to run out of trees. the reverse is tnie. Every country in Europe has an annual growth of timber that far exceeds their Iiarvest. And so the Europeans now and not only traditional consuming countries like Grrmany and France are growing more wood. and they are esponiny this wood to other markets. Coughman also commrnted on the global decrease in effective demand for construction grade lumber: What's happening is that not only are overall housins stans down. single family starts are down.. ..lcould go into the reasons for it. but there is less and less of the traditional, and even within the traditional, there seems to be a greaier will ingness to accept European species or other species whereas before they had depended on hemlock for example as a basic building material (Steve Coughman. Mark Forsyth interview. CBC Radio. January 29. I 9%). Althouyh/ore.s/ rco-.systems are scarce, there does not appear to be a shonaye of fibre farms. This creates a situation in which corporations that consume large amounts of paper and other wood products have access to economically viable alternatives to old growth timber. It has also created new. less politically troublesome investment oppominities for timber corporations like MacMillan-Bloedel, which has invested in pine plantations in the U.S. southeast. However. these changes in the global econorny tend to exacerbate, rather than alleviate unemployment among B.C.'s forest sector workers. If corporations like Macmillan- 188 Bloedel and Interfor do stan to use labour intensive timber extraction techniques like partial cutting more extensively, it will create more jobs for loggers. However, if no steps are taken to create more value added jobs in pulp and sawmills. then a larger land base will be required in order to hold employment levels constant in the niills. Which in turn means that there will be less land available for wilderness preservation. Tzeporah Berman is aware of the lony- term shon comings of reforms like wilderness preservation which occur without restructuring the industry in a rnanner which increases the jobs to timber ratio She stated that if parks are created without niaking the move toward more value added production. then unernployment would increase. wliicli would in turn create a situation in which the state would be under pressure to open up park land to resource exploitation (Berman. author interview, March 20, 1997). However. Berrnan and others involved in the forest campniy. see themselves as engaged in a desperate battle to preserve the last remnants of temperate rainforests. "On the Coast, our analysis is that we have 5-1 O years of coastal temperate rainforests, before there are no areas that are large enough to support ecological diversitv over the Ions term" (Berman, author interview. March 20. 1997). Karen Mahon also expressed a sense of urgency in reyard to protecting temperate rainforests. "There is a pan of me, that when 1 get panicky about how many years are left and how much we are not winniny, 1 think, 1'11 do what works. And if an old growth. " Save the trees" kind of campaign works, alright. It's not up to me to redesign the economy for god's sake!" (Karen Mahon, author interview, December 3, 1996). Cashore and Bernstein's assertion that the New Democratic Party (NDP) under Gien Clark is much less tolerant of criticism from environmental groups than it was under Mike 189 Harcourt's leadership appears to be valid. During Harcourt's tenure. the NDP was willing to admit the governnirnt had implemented policies which resulted in environmental degradation and resource depletion. This was not a politically costly concession on the part of the NDP. since in the past 30 years. the NDP was the rnajority panv once. in the early 1970s. Thus. the past mistakes could be blamed on the So-Creds and other parties. Criticisni from environmental groups \vas not a direct criticism of NDP policies Through creating more parks and introducing new regulations like the Forest Prnctices Code. the NDP promised that it would correct the mistakes made by past governments. When Greenpeace released its report Broken Promises: The Truth About What 's Hapeninrr to British Columbia's Forests in 1997, the report directlv criticized the NDP and quoted survey results which directly criticized Glen Clark. e.g.,"8 19.0 of polled residents in BC believe thüt Premier Glen Clark is not doiny enough to protect B.C.'sforests" (Broken promis^, p. 5). In retaliation, Clark responded with rhetoric similar to that used by the Forest Alliance and other front groups. However. as discussed in chapter three. recent survev data indicates that next to the Green party. NDP supporters expressed the most concern regarding environmental issues. The high degree of concem regarding environmental issues among MW supporters, places the NDP in a position of having to defend its policies but not attacking its critics too harshly for fear of losing a substantial number of votes to the Green Party. Cashore and Berstein criticism of Greenpeace's failure to develop ties with domestic groups is a very valid criticism. Greenpeace's Vancouver branch 1s located on Commercial Drive, an "alternative neighbourhood" which is far removed from the concerns of the rural working class. Greenpeace sets up information tables on Commercial Drive. but in rural. timber-dependent communities Greenpeace's agenda is presented to the public mainly via organizations like the Forest Alliance. Share Groups. and the Soo Coalition or from "local" newspapers, eg,The Bridve River Lillooet News, which is also part of Conrad Black's media empire. Black employs an editor who is of the opinion that the Forest Alliance is an institution that "focuses on clearing up misrepresentations about the industry in the media. ." (Bribe River Lillooet News ). Greenpeace allots a verv srnall portion of its resources to espiaining its agenda to forest workers and other rrsidents of timber dependent communities. Funhermore. althouyh the people who currently work on the Greenpeace forest campaign have developed working relationships with sonie of the PPWC's national officers. this has not resulted in close consultation between these two organizations. Prior to engaging in the "Great Bear Rainforest" campaign. the PPWC was not informed about the campaign or asked to yive its advice regarding the tactics utilized. As will be discussed in chapter seven. it was only after the IWA blockade that Greenpeace sought out the advice and support of the PPWC. Tzeporah Berman acknowledged that Greenpeace does not spend a signitïcant amount of its time or resources on communicating with forest workers. However, she contends that the financial resources simply are not available. The bottom line for us is resources. People think that Greenpeace is huge. And that's right, we are, we have offices al! over the world. Greenpeace Canada is one of the smallest offices. It has a very small budget compared to many of the other offices. And the forest budget is incredibly small. People talk about how Greenpeace takes in a million or a billion dollars a year or whatever these figures are that you hear al1 the time. But a lot of those dollars go to keeping the oqanization up and mnning, unfortunately. a lot of it goes to fund raising. .... And when you actually try to get down to how much money you have left over to run a campaign ... it's not a lot of money .... If you look at the forest campaign, people think that the forest campaign is so huge. Well, there are two people working in al1 of Canada on forest issues ... Karen and Tamara ...the bottom line is. we can reach more people doing work in Vancouver than we can in other places. While we're not necessarily reaching the people that it is most affecting, the reality is, the state of democracv in Canada is. we're reaching the decision makers We have to ensure that the people who hear us loud and clear are yovernment and industry decision makers. The people who live in rural communities have been robbed of making the decisions over the forests that are in their back yard or their own livelihoods. And, while certainly many of us wish that we could be addressing that in a more systemic wav. it's a race ügainst time. On the coast. Our analysis is that we have 5- IO years of coastal temperate rainforest before there are no areas that are large enough to support ecological diversity over the long terni. So. if you look at tliat time line and also look at Our resources. it rnakes übsolute sense that Our work is focused on the largest companies and the government We don't do a lot of public education work (Berman, author interview, blarçh 20, 1997) Funhermore, Berman believes that it would be futile and counter-productive to engage in a counter-ideological campai y n agai nst timber capital ists. To say that in order to protect the environment, you have to lose jobs. is something, is public relations that the industry has cooked up in order to set the local commuiiities to tight their battles for thrm..It's al1 one issue. 1 don? think that we have done enough to reach people who actually work in the Forest ...to communicate this to them. The problem is, what we're up ayainst is a multi-million dollar pub1 ic relations campaign. And we don? have the money or access that they do. Just look at that big rally that companies organized as the worken rally in British Columbia in 1994, was it? Over ten thousand forestry workers came to the lawn of the legislature. That was described as this big workers uprising against environmentalists. But we al1 know that the companies gave them the day off and paid them to go and said, "Go here", what they are doing is creatiny dissent. Creating an anti- environmental movement and they have been doing it for years in a very conscious way. For us to fight that is very difficult and 1 think it is what the companies want us to do. They want us to fight the BC Forest Alliance, to fight the local communities to put al1 of our efforts into that. lnstead of actually working in the marketplace in other countries to raise the profile of the issue. In many ways, I think that it is a diversion (Berman, author interview, March 20, 1997). Berman's decision to shy away from engaging in a public relations spending war with timber capitalists in rural communities is probably a wise one. The companies have direct access to workers via their work sites. and despite their attempts to ponray themseives as the underdog in a David and Goliath stnigple against Greenpeace (e.9..The Province J~ine15. 1997). timber capitalists have far more thancial rcsources at their disposa1 than Greenpeace (The Vancouver Suq March 15. 1996. p. D 6).However. there are some tactics utilized by the Forest Alliance. which could also be utilized bv Greenpeace. that are verv low cost and reach a large audience. For instance. when Patrick Moore writes a letter to the editor of a paper. it does not go out to ji~stone newspaper. the lettrr appears in both major papers and in srnall. rural areas as well. When someonr froni Greenpeace sends a letter ro the editor. it usually just appears in one or two of the major newspapers. Throughout its brief history, Greenpeace has often been extremely successful at finding low-cost ways to communicate with the public. However. explainhg its policies to the rural working class and offering a rebuttal to the anti-environmentalist corporate propayanda which is disseminated in rural communities does not appear to be a high prioritv for Greenpeace. Other organizations which have less financial resources than Greenpeace. have found ways to challenge corporate propayanda. Local 2 of the PPWC started a web site (http://www.seaside.net/ppwc?/views.htm) during its long strike against New Zealand based Fletcher Challenge. More recently. the Forest Action Network developed a web page. "Patrick Moore is a Big Fat Liar" (http://www.fanweb.org),which details the sources of the Forest Alliance's funding and provides a critique of Moore's position on industrial forestry 193 practices. An article on the website was done by Globe and Mail reporter Ross Howard. which in turn led to Moore trading insults with Howard at a conference in Vancouver, which in tum led to funher publicity for the website from an anicle that appeared in the Straiu (April 7-9 1998, p. 9). Targeting audiences in Europe and urban B.C. is undoubtedly the best way for Greenpeace to increase its membership and thancial resources. Although refraining from engaging in education and membership drives in rural. timber dependent communities mav lead to higher financial returns. at least in the short run. this strategy also likely undermines the long term success of the Canadian forest campaign. Greenpeace's willingness to ignore the hinterland creates a vacuum which corporate front groups have been very willing to fill, This vinually guarantees that when rural communities are the sites at which the contlict over forested land is fought. environrnentalists will be met witti strong. and at times. violent opposition. Altercations between environmentalists and forest sector workers make an attractive story for the media to focus on; which in turn reinforces the "jobs vs. the environment" dichotomy. Moreover, while market pressure froni foreign buyers has clearly had some influence on the policies of timber corporations. the provincial governrnent is the institution which regulates capital's access to Crown forests and it is the voting public in B.C. that determines which pany is able to form a governrnent. A public which remains uninformed of the importance of protecting old growth forests, the unsustainable AAC. and the lack of value added production in B.C..is unlikely to support a political party which seeks to radically restructure the industry. Mutation Withiii the Environmental Movement Greenpeace emerged due to the failure of traditional environmental organizations to address the social and ecological problems created by the development of nuclear technology . As the yroup evolved into a multi-national non-sovernmental organization, it became more reluctant to address "pol itical issues" and designed its cam paigns and tactics with the aim of appealing to politically moderate. middle-class donors. However. at the regional level. activisrs still retain some latitude in designing carnpaigns The activists interviewed for this project were very aware of how capital's exploitation of labour has increased simultaneously with capital's exploitation of nature. Funhrrmore. thev are aware of the futility of limiting their campaign to wildernesç preservation. This resulted in a forest campaign which sought to decrease both capital's exploitation of forests and its exploitation of forest workers. which sets Greenpeace apart from more traditional "preservationist" organizations like the Sierra Club or the Nature Conservancy. However. in response to the unprecedented rate at which first nature is being destroyed. Greenpeace's focus remains concentrated on protecting the last rernnants of old growth forests. CHAPTER SEVEN MUTATION WITHIN THE LABOUR MOVEMENT "The convention strungly urge the federal government of Canada anl the pmvincinl guvernmenf uf RC tu bring forth legislatiun tu prevent erport of MW materials which cnn lie prucesserl in this country ivitli the 4th of attaining zeru unemphymen? and wntinrtotts erpansiun uf orw nittiunnl econotny " 1971 PP WC' Conwntiun Pulicy St(tternent "Uncun tru Ileil #ruwrli Iras vnstly mapifiel thr Greenhouse Effect. Scientists ure predicting tlrnt Iiaif the world 's ocetin beac hes IV il1 he floorled.. huge ssiuctthes uf furest /and ivill be destroyed by n cu~nhincitionuf furest /ires, insect plagues, und tlisease; weather will hect~memure extrente ~nrlrinpredict~ble. .. .gruwtli is (4 suicide rnmhine rotlt er thun (1 vehicle to full empkoy nient " PP WC's Nmvs'vletter, The I.cu/lcr 1 9 9 7 .As has been detailed in previous chapters. the rate of capital's exploitation of forests and forest sector workers has dramatically accelerated during the past two decades. O'Connor asserts that by increasing the exploitation of these two production conditions, capital enhiinces the potential for a labour-environmentalist alliance, as reduçing one form of exploitation presupposes reducing the other. In the case of B.C.'s forest industry. there is a certain degree of overlap between those primarily interested in protectiny forest eco-s ystems and those primarily interested in protecting the standard of living of forest sector workers. in the shon term, it may be possible to temporarily alleviate some of effects of capital's increased exploitation of labour by increasing iü exploitation of nature, i.e.,by rnaintaining or even increasing the amount of fibre which is available to capital intensive mills. However, due to the fact that for at least two decades the forests have been exploited at a rate which exceeds their ability to reproduce themselves, maintaining the present rate of exploitation only delays inevitable job losses. Like the tïshers on Canada's east coast, forest sector workers have a vested interest in sustainably harvesting the resource which is the source of their livelihoods. Extracting timber from a forest in a rnanner which allows it to reproduce sufficient tïbre is not necessarily the same as estracting tirnber in a manner which ensures the preservation of biologically diverse forest eco-svsterns. However. as will be discussed below. the t'eld of concern of some forest sector workers extends far beyond narrow economic self- interest. There are three main unions which represent forest sector workers in B C . the IW.4 (Industrial. Wood. and Allied Workers of Canada). the CEP. (Communications. Eneryy. and Paper Workers) . and the PPWC (Pulp. Paper. and Woodworkrrs of Canada). The PPWC is the focus of this study due to its policies wliich address both capital's exploitation of labour and nature, and its willingness to work with environmental organizations. Like some environmental organizations. the PPWC's policies have evolved to address problems which have been made more apparent due to the rapid increase in capital's exploitation of land and labour. However, the PPWC is not the only woodworkers union which has sought to address both foms of capitalist exploitation. The CEP is currently engaged in a carnpaign in Newtbundland to abolish the use of mechanical timber harvesters. The union contends tliat the harvesters put loggers out of work in the short terrn. Moreover, due to soi1 degradation which results from mechanical harvesters, the use of capital intensive timber extraction methods interfere with the long tenn ability of the forests to reproduce themselves. The CEP has also successfully bargained for a reduced work week in several of the mills and factories where it has locals. Conversely, the IWA. which remains the largest woodworker's union in B.C.. continues to support the current structure of the industry and has maintained very close ties with tirnber capitalists. Furthermore, in an attempt to alleviate the effects of the increased exploitation of labour, the union's leadership has joined capital in its efforts to increase its exploitation of nature. Thus. it will be aryued that labour's response to capitalist exploitation cannot be taken for granted. A union's history. political structure. and leadership all affect iü relationship with capital and its responsiveness to the will of its rnnk-and-file membership. ln order to understand the different policies of the IWA and the PPWC it is necessarv to be familiar with their histories and poli~icalstructures as well as significant events in labour history which transpired prior to the formation of these unions. kloreover. if one's primary information regarding forest sector unions is the conternporary popular press. it might be reasonable to assume that woodworker's unions in B.C. are inherentiy consemative. reactionary, and short-sighted; the history of woodworker's unions in B.C. tells a much different story. Thus, a brief history of woodworker's unions in British Columbia and the U.S. Pacific Nonhwest will be summarized. In the first half of the twentieth century, timber capitalists, governments on both sides of the Canadian4J.S. border. reactionary social movements, and moderates within the labour movement, al1 contributed to the creation of a political environment which made it virtually impossible for radical unions to exist. Long before environmentalists were locking homs with timber capitalists, labour activists were enyaged in a struggle to reduce capital's exploitation of logprs and millworkers. In the early twentieth century, established trade unions in North America were not interested in organiziny forest sector workers. The AFL approached lumber workers skeptically because they were mostl y foreign-born, and prone to radicalism. The Brotherhood of Carpeniers, into whose jurisdiction the woodworkers would have fallen. were interested in having jurisdictional hegemony over them. but not in organizing them because they feared that these "uncarpenterl i ke carpenters" would swamp the craft-oriented structure and "atternpt to foist industrial unionism upon the carpenters." The organization of the "timber beasts". as early woodworkers were called, had therefore to await the formation of the lndustrial Workers of the World (IWW) (Lembke and Tattam 1984. p. 12). The Industrial Workers of the World, was î'ormed in 1905. 1. W.W. members or "Wobblies".' were tiyhting for basic safety regiilations. iniproved living conditions in logying camps. and an ei-,ht Iiour work day Howevrr. the Wobblies were not content to slightly improve the workins conditions aid material cornforts of the working class. Strikes and other tbrms of protest were nlso a mrans of alteriny the social relations of production. The working class and the employing class have nothing in common. There can be no peace so long as hunger and want are round among millions of working people and the few. who make up the ernploying class, have ail the good things in life. Between these two classes a struggle must yo on until the workers of the world organize as a class. take possession of the eanh and the machinery of production, and abolish the wage systern (Preamble of the I.W.W. 1908. quoted in Litwack 1962, p. 42). In the US. Pacific Nonhwest. the I.W.W. was successful in reducing working hours and improving the safety and living conditions of losgers. Blowing a whistle at the end of an eight hour day and havins the workers leave the woods was one tactic that was panicularly ' The origins of the term "Wobbly" have been traced to a Chinese immigrant who owned a restaurant in Vancouver. The restaurant owner supponed the 1.W. W. and would extend credit to its rnembers. Unable to pronounce the letter "w", he would ask his customers if they were members of the "1 Wobbly Wobbly." See, Where the Fraser River Flow by Mark Leier, 1990. New Star Books: Vancouver. 199 successful (Leier, 1990). Perhaps these successes, combined with the union's radical rhetoric, caused timber capitalists. pvernment officiais, and reactionary oryanizations to fear the I.W.W. and engage in a campaign to rid the labour movernent of al1 those whose goals were not limited to simply gaining concessions from timber capitalists ..\fter World War 1, the U.S. gwernment and reactionary organizarions. Le.. American Legionaries. engaged in a major assault upon radical labour leaders. On Armistice Day in 19 19. a mob of American Legionaries stormed an 1.W.W hall in Centralia, Washington. LW W memben shot and killed three Lgionaries. Wesley Everest. a lumberjack and 1.W.W member was chased until he reached the Skookumchuck River. at whicli point he shot and killed one of his pursuers. Everest was later taken hma lail by a niob. castratrd. and hung from a bridge. Seven Wobblies were later convicted of murder and one was found insane for tiring upon the American Legionaries who attacked the I.W W hall. In the United States. on January 1, 1920, a massive wave of arrests in which 10.000 people. most trade union leaders andior members. were either placed in prison or deponed. began. The 1.W.W. was the main target of the government's attempt to purge radical labour activists from American soi! (Lembke and Tattarn, 1984. pp. 14- 16). After the 1920 purge, the 1. W.W. ceased to be a significant force in the U.S.labour movement. The I.W.W. began oryanizing loggers and miners in British Columbia in the early 1900s. Prominent 1. W.W. members from the U.S.. such as Big Bill Haywood and the Song writer Joe Hill travelled to B.C. to help organize workers. While in B.C.. Joe Hill wrote several songs for B.C. Wobblies includiny "Where the Fraser River Flows" (Leier 1990, p. 50). The Wobblies remained a significant political force in British Columbia for a short 200 period after the I.W.W. was politically neutralized in the US. In 1924 the I.W.W. organized a strike involving 1000 logsers and 350 rniilworkers throughout the province. The strikers demanded an eight hour work day. Four dollars daily pay. an end to mail censorship, an end of discrimination against I.W.W. members. and the release of al1 political prisoners in the U.S. (Leier, 1990). Although the strikers eventually returned to work without anv of their demands being met, capitalists pressured the government to repress the 1. W.W. The Calgary and Vancouver boards of trade called on the federal government to outlaw the I.W. W and immigration nuthorities atternpted to depon îb ~reignWobblirs The Mountain Lunibrr blanufacturer's Association circulated a bliick list of 1.W W members to timber capitalists and advised them that: ..everyeffort should be made to prevent the IWW or their sympathizers obtaining a foothold in your operations. There is only one way to prevent this. and that is by destroyins the root of the trouble-Le.. get rid of the agitators, deleyates and in general the trouble makers. Eliminate them as tàr as possible before they enter your employ, by keeping a close check on al1 new men seeking emplovment (quoted in Leier 1990. p. 42). Violent suppression of the I.W.W. did not occur on the same sale in Canada as it did in the U. S., however, there were several incidents in which 1. W.W. members were murdered by vigilantes in B.C. (Leier, 1990). In addition to organized resistance from the state and timber capitalists. the I.W.W. faced opposition from other segments within the labour movement. As early as 19 13, in an attempt to counter the LW.W.'s organizing efforts in B.C. logging camps, American Federation of Labor (ML) President Samuel Gompers. with the help of the Vancouver Trades and Labour Council. began organizing B.C. logers (Leier, 1990). In addition to beins at losgerheads with conservative unions like the AFL. the 20 1 I.W.W. was unable to establish strong alliances with radical social movements such as the Socialist Party of Canada (SPC). The SPC advocated gaininy control of the state via parliamentary elections whereas the I.W.W. insisted that the capitalist state could not be democratized and favoured direct action by rank-and-file workers to gain control of the means of production (Leier. 1990). Thus. due to a combination of vigilante violence, povernment repression. blacklisting and other forms of harassrnent by tirnber capitalists. and a lack of solidaritv within the labour movement. the I.W.W.ceased to be a significant political force in BC. after 1924 (Leier. 1990). Thrre is a sophisticated branch within the capitalist "power elite" (Domhoff. 1990). which is willing to tolerate organized labour to a certain degree as n means of preventing either constant labour unrest or total revolution. Early in the twentieth century a tacit agreement was reac hed between the capitalist ciass and labour act ivists: "business unions" whose yoals were lirnited to increasing wages and benefits etc.. but did not question or seek to change the existing social relations of production would be tolerated as a necessary evii which was the only alternative to constant social unrest. Unions and union leaders who sought to democratize social production would be neutralized by any means deemed necessary. Radical leaders eg, Bill Haywood or loe Hill, would be deported, black listed by capitalists, killed by vigilante mobs. or even murdered by the state on fabricated criminal charges More moderate "business union" leaders. like American Federation of Labour President Samuel Gompers, who believed that unions and strikes were simply a means of gaining a yreater share of the wealth for workers (Litwack 1962, 34-35). but did not seek to alter the existing social relations of production, were able to gain entry into the upper-middle class (Zinn 1995. pp. 32 1-327 ). The IWA: Fronr Radical Union to Business Union After the violent suppression of radicals on both sides of the Canadian-U.S. border many labour activists made conscious efforts to avoid appearing too "radical" in the eyes of timber capitalists and government officiiils However. despite the murder. torture. deportation. and incarceration of many labour activists. labour leaders on both sides of the Canadian-US. border continued their effons to organize forest sector workrrs and (at least for a brief time)continued to pursue the goal of having workers own and control the nienns of production. In 1937. the Federation of Woodworkers nftïliiited with the Con-ress of lndustrial Organizations (C.i.0.) and became the International Woodworkers of Arnerica (IWA), which had locals in both Canada and the U.S. The name "International Wood Workers of America" was a popular choice. but it was rejectrd for fear that the new union's acronym (LW,W .A.)would be falsely associated with the 1. W,W. Tlius. from the beginning the IWA sought to placate the fears of tirnber capitalists. The IWXs first president was Harold Pritcheit. After praduating from high school Pritchett wcnt to work in a B.C. sawmill for eleven cents an hour. Subsequent to experiencing capitalist exploitation first hand. he became a devoted reader of Marx. According to Pritchett: From the early formation of the IWA. the chosen and democratically elected leadership of this great union fully understood the forces determining their position in society. For them, the union stmgyle was only pan of a larger political strugsle wayed between labour and capital (Fonvard. written by Pritchett, in Lembke and Tattam, 1983) Almost from the beginning, the leadership of the IWA was the targeted by the 203 Canadian gvernment. U.S. pvernment, timber capitalists. reactionary organizations. and conservative labour leaders. In 1938, the U.S. House Committee on Un-American Activities began an investigation of IWA President, Harold Pritchett. During this investisation, John Frey, president of the Metai Trades Depanment of the American Federation of Labor (ML). testified before Congress that: "....thepresident of this organization [the IWA] is Harold Pritchett, a Canadian Communist" (Frey. quoted in Lembke and Tattam. 1983 p. 6 1). Pritchett was the target of an investigation conducted by the "Red Squad" of Portland. Oregon's police depanment. a division that \vas originally rstablished to destroy the 1. W W, The American Legion Subversive .4ctivities Committee, which was financially supponed by Oregon businesses. supplied lists of suspected Communisrs and labour organizers to empioyers. In 1939, the reactionary organization. "Americans Incorporated" sponsored a "National Defense and Americanism Rally" to discuss. "whether the IWA president is the type of alien communist that we [Americans Incorporated] want at the head of our iabor organizations" (Lembke and Tattam 1983. p. 59). .4s evidenced by the case study of corporate front groups in Chapter Four, these aspects (anti-communist hysteria and xenophobia) of the rhetoric employed by the reactionary right have not significantly clianged throughout the twentieth century. Moreover, the practice of capital either covertly or openly financing riyht-wing reactionary organizations also continues. Pritchett was eventually deported from the U.S. and was not allowed to return even to perform his duties as the international union's president. Lembke and Tanam contend that primarily due to interference from the Canadian government, the Canadian Conpress of Labour (CCL), the Congress of Industrial Organization (CIO)and the U.S. sovernment, 204 Pritchett was removed from ofike in 194 1 and replaced by the more moderate "White Bloc" leadership. Thus. the change from a radical union to a business union was primarily due to the interference of external actors. not a rejection of the radical leadership by the rank-and- file. Under the White Bloc leadership. the IWA passed a resolution which required al1 IWA rnernbers to either break all ties with the Communist Party or leave the union. The resolution also prohibited any mernber who had eiw been a member of the Cornmunist pany from holding office in the IW.4 (Lembke and Tattam 1983. p 1 83). Lembke and Tiittam funher contend that the post-Çornmunist W.-\ Presidents. such as -41 Hartung. wliom Pritchett Iiad defeated in an election durin3 the 1930s. did not have the süme degrer of support nmong the rank-and-file as their Comrnunist predecessors. and were able to advance their pol itical careers primarily due to taking advantage of outside intervention from the state and by inyratiating thernselves to the business community. The original IWA leadership had ver? different ideas regarding the function of trade unions and the relationship between forests and forest workers than the "business union" leadership which has been in power since Wortd War II: Comrnunists not only out-performed their opponents as organizers. but they offered a superior concept of what industrial unionism shouid be. For them. unions were not ends in themselves but rather organizing centers for the working class. One only has to review the newspapers published by the union under the two regimes to get a sense of the difference between them. Under Comrnunist editorship, the IWA's paper, the ïjmheniarker. opposed clearcutting of forests and log expons and promoted reforestation and consetvation (Lembke and Tattam 1983. p. 1 77). In the post-World War II era until the early 1970s. the majority of rank-and-file workers were likely pacified by the unprecedented gains in wages and benefits they received 205 during this period. These gains were made possible due to an unprecedented high demand for construction-grade lumber in North .Arnerica and by over-exploiting forests. There has also been some speculation that the relativelv low stumpage rates charged bv the B.C. government enabled timber capitalists to externalize the costs of a highly paid work force on to the public and that the pvernment often responded to increased labour costs by reducins stumpage fees (Marchak 1983. pp. 70-72). Although there were periodic strikes occurring during the post-World War II era. there was no strong opposition to the status quo among workers The abundance of cheap timber. strong markets. and the purging of radical workers from the labour movement made the contlict betwen labour and capital less transparent for several decades. Thus. rank-and-file ivorkrrs brcaniti niore cornplacent and more wiiliny to accept the entrenched "business union" leadership, The 1W.A remains the larsest wvoodworkers union in B.C. and its leadership has maintained a non-confrontational pol icy with management. Various scholars, (e.g.. Marchak 1995; M'Gonigle and Parfin 1994) have observed that despite changes implemented by timber capitalists which have led to massive job losses among forest sector workers and a dramatic decrease in union membership, the LWX leadership has continued to suppon both capital's environmental and labour policies. Patricia Marchak was once threatened with a lawsuit by the IWA for stating in a journal article that many woodworkers in B.C.'s lnterior felt that the union did not act in the best interest of its membership (Marchak, author interview, November 10, 1997). The criticism of the IWA's leadership is not limited to academics, as will be discussed later in this chapter, many of the PPWC mernbers who were interviewed characterized former IWA President Jack Munro as being a self-serving leader who was willing to prornote his own career at the expense of rank-and-file forest sector workers . IWA membership peaked at approximately 50,000 workers in 1979. by 1995 the union's membership had been reduced by alrnost 50 percent to 27, 500 (Marchak 1995. p. 99). As discussed in chapter three, forest sector job losses have primarily resulted from mechanizat ion and other changes. e.g., full Hexi bili ty management systems. that were implemented by timber corporations. Despite tliese changes. the IWA leadership has continued to suppon the present structure of the forest industry and take the position that environmental reforrns are primarilv responsible for job losses among Forest sector workers. For instance, a recent IWA Canada publication assens that: Fonunately. today 's advanced technology rnakes possible both hiy h wages and decent working conditions in a fully competitive, highly efficient industry . Canadian sawndls. loggins operations and other woodworking plants are among the most productive and competitive in the world: this allows Canadian workers to gain a steadv and even growing share of wealth generated in the industry without undermining our ability to export our products into international markets...... Since the early eiyhties, technological change has been much less a factor in forest sector job loss than has regulatory change and removals of lands from production. Certainly that has been the case in the U.S. Pacific Nonhwest, where job loss due to injunctions in suppon of the northern spotted owl caused roughly 50 percent reductions in timber harvestiny on federal lands between 1988 and 1992. This led to the ioss of nearly 30.000 forest sector jobs (IWA, November 1996).' ? This is clearly a "cooked" example. The court decision to halt logging on federally owned old growth forests in the Pacific Northwest came about after 90 percent of the region's old growth had already been loyged. To log the remaining old growth forests would have contravened the U.S. Endanyered Species Act. According to U.S. Vice President Al Gore, "lronically, if those wishing to continue the logging had won, their jobs would have been lost anyway as soon as the remaining 10 percent of the forest was cut. The only issue was whether they would shift to new employment before or after the last rernnant of the forest was pne" What is interestins about this publication from a Canadian union. is that it ignores data regardiny the causes of job loss in British Columbia. As will be discussed below. the rnillworkers interviewed for this project did not blame environmental refoms for causins job loss. It would be interesthg to survey rank-and-file IWA members in B.C. to find out what their perceptions are regarding job loss in the timber industry The massive amount of jobs which have been lost by IWA members mav br one Rctor which has led them to support capital in its anempts to continue esploiting the forests in an unsustainable rnanner. Any reduction in capital's exploitation of nature that is not b accompanied by decreasins capital's exploitation of labour (e.g., implementing labour intensive logginy and milling practices) will likely result in job loss Faced with this situation. union leaders may attempt to delay the inrvitable job losses that will occur when economically viable timber supplies have been exhausted by endorsing corporate practices (Gore 1993, p. 12 1). In Orepn, the US'S"timber basket", timber corporations predicted that the Clinton plan would result in 100,000 forest sector jobs would being lost and that the state's economy would be devastated. An implicit pan of this message was that loggins the remainins old growth forests would save these jobs. .As a result of wilderness preservation, 15.000 Forest sector jobs were lost. During that same period, 20,000 new jobs were created in the high tech industry. The state provided funds to retrain forest sector workers to perfonn these jobs. During the period of economic restructuring, the average waye in Orepn i~~~rea.s~~Jarrdthe .+-taie S ~mmploymentk vddippud brio w the ~wtiurrolaverage. In tim ber dependent counties, propeny values increased and there was also a net increase in employment. Oregon continues to produce 5 billion board feet of timber per year. More timber is extracted from second growth forests and timber that would have been previously bumed as scrap is used to create value added products. Oregon's value added timber manufacturiny industry currently employs more people than the primary sector. Furthemore, the high tech sector has surpassed the timber sector as the major employer (See, New York TkOct. 1 1, 1 994). which are neither ecologically nor economically sustainable. On an individual basis. especially when union leader or individual worker is nearing retirement age, endorsing such policies may even be economically rational. However, not al1 woodworker's unions have responded to massive job losses among their memberships by endorsing unsustainable timber extraction practices. In recent years. the commercial extinction of the cod fishery on Canada's east coast and endanpered salmon runs on its West coast have made labour activists more aware of the consequences of over- exploiting a resource Moreover. these events mâv have made workers more sceptical of the .. ability of "experts" employed by capital and the state to "manage these resources on a sustainable basis. Wayne Budgell, Secretary-Treasurer of the Communication. Energy, and Papeworker's Local 60 in Newfoundland believes that mechanical trer harvesters constitute a similar threat to woodworkers as factory trawlers and other high tech Fishing machinery posed to workers who depended on the cod fishery. We have lost approximately 500 members since 1989. That's right out of our local... that's not the non-union sector at all. that's just union jobs.. . .There's appronimately 1000 people who have lost their jobs within the last five or six years with mechanical harvesters... .Theylre very environmentally unfriendly . We've got a second yrowth in Newfoundland and with Our conventional harvesting, which is a loger with a chainsaw, we have yood re-growth. As a matter of fact, we have to thin it because it grows back so thick... .But the harvester. when they go in. they totally destroy the topsoil and there be no second growth... .We certainly do compare the forest industry to the fishing industry. A dragger and a harvester. The dragpr scrape the bottom. The harvester rape the topsoil and the regeneration of trees (CBC Radio. "As It Happens" Auyust 6. 1997). Thus, the job losses which IWA members have sustained over the past two decades rnay be a factor in shaping the union's policies. but job loss in itself is not sufficient to explain why the 209 IWA's policies regarding both land and labour are dramatically different from those of the CEP and the PPWC As was detailed above, both external actors and moderates from within the IWA created conditions in which radical leaders could not exist and "business union" leaders could tlourish. Hence. since the post-World War II era. the IWA has had a steady succession of "business union" leaders. As will be discussed below. the political structure of the IWA enables i ts leadership to insulate itself from the conseq uences of its decisions which directlv affect ran k-and-file workers. Moreover. the union's pol itical structure does not give ran k- and-file workers the right to directlv elect those who purpon to represent them. While the IWA's leadership has maintained a close alliance with timber capitalists. the union's rank-and-tiie membership has become more critical of timber corporations in recent years. As discussed in chapter four. in January 1997 IWA employees from the Ainsworth Mill in Lillooet, blocked log from leaving Ainsworth's log yard and enpased in a "wild cat" strike which was not approved by the IWA leadership. The workers were protesting ayainst Ainsworth exporting logs extracted from the Lillooet area to another Ainsworth mil1 which is more highly mechanized. Because the strike action was not approved by the union's leadership. the striker's received no strike pay or other support from the national office. They soon retumed to work and within less than a year more than fifty of the workers lost their jobs. More recently. the Port Albemi local of the IWA voted to withdraw its financial support of the New Democratic Pany (NDP) due to the provincial government's failure to set standards requiring timber corporations to create a minimum number of jobs from timber 210 they have extracted from publicly owned forests. Representatives from the local stated that they had no intention of supportin3 other political parties. panicularly the Liberai opposition. The decision to withdraw financial support from the NDP was due to its refusal to require MacMillan-Bloedel to create more jobs with the wood it extracts from Crown land in the Port Alberni area. The IWA circulated a petition in the Port Alberni area demanding that MacMillan Bloedei's Tree Farm License be revoked and that the Forest .4ct be re-written to include a clause which ties timber extraction to job creation (Victoria Times Colonist blarch 23. 1998). Conspicuously absent Frorn either of these protests was any show of support. throuçh either direct action or press releases. from environmental organizations. eg. WCWC, Greenpeace. which have called upon industry and the yovernment ro create more jobs through value added manufacturing. Although there have been some indications that the rank-and-file of the IWA are not satisfied with the status quo, the political structure of the IWA appears to be designed to limit direct democratic participation from the rank-and-file membership. The president of the IWA receives a yearly salary which exceeds $85.000 (IWA Canada 1995. p 13). The salary is not tied in any way to the wages made by rank-and-file workers. Furthermore. the rank- and-fi le do not direct1y nominate or vote for national officers. 01-11y "accredited delegates" can nominate IWA members for national office. National Officers and National Trustees are automatically accredited deleyates. Other delegates are elected by IWA locals and sent to the national convention. A general election in which the rank-and-file membership can participate, only occurs in the event that there is more than one candidate nominated for a national office. The rank-and-file are limited to voting for candidates selected by accredited 21 1 delegates. "Write ins shall not be permitted on referendum ballots for anv election of officers in IWA Canada" (IWA-Canada 1995. p. 18). The political structure of the IW.4 appears to lend itself more to cronyism than to democratic control and direct political participation of the rank-and-file. In a nutsheil. the leadership of the IWA is not directly tinancially affected by the agreements it makes with management nor is it directly elected by the men and women which it purpons to represent. iMoreover. once a person is elected to a national office, thev are very unlikely to ever return to the bush or to a mill. Thus. they do not directly experience the working conditions of the rank-and-file. which in turn likely decreases their abilitv to empatliize with the plight of cornmon workers The Genesis of the Pulp Paper and Woodworkers of Canadii Unlike the IWA. the PPWC has never had external actors interfere with the right of rank-and-file workers to select their own leaders. The political structure of the PPWC is more democtatic than the IWA. Moreover, its leadership is not as insulated as the IWA from the consequences of the agreements that it reaches with the management of timber corporations. Thus, relative to the IW.4. the PPWC's leadership is very responsive to the will of its rank-and-file membership and maintains a more adversarious relationship with management than the IWA. The PPWC was formed in 1963 as a result of five B.C.locals breaking away from the U.S. based. International Brotherhood of Pulp. Sulphite. and Papermill Workers. The original leadership of the IWA saw the union as a means of improving the conditions of the workins class in the short-term. and as an institution which would play a part in the transition to socialism in the long-term. The IWA was formed during a period in which many working class people lived in absolute poverty. The land itself was more capable of producing wealtli than it is today. However, the relations of production denied millions of people access to nature. In the mesof Wrath John Steinbeck, who lived among indigent agriculturai workers. was able to convey the anger of the masses to the reading public: And a homeless hungry man, driving the road with his wife beside him and his hungry children in the back seat. could look at the fallow fields which might produce food but not profit. and the man could know how a fallow field is a sin and the unused land a crime against his thin children ... And in the south he sacv golden oranges hanging on the trees, the little solden oranges on the dark green trees: and guards with shotguns patroll ing the lines so a man might not pick an orange for a ihin child. oranges to be dumped if the price was low . . . (Steinbeck quoted in Zinn 1995. p 380) These were times which led manv people involved in the labour movement to conclude that socialism was the only means for the working class to have access to the abundance of wealth made possible by capitalism. By the time the PPWC was formed, forest sector workers were enjoying an unprecedented degree of material prosperity. During ihis rra. many workers likely did not see a socialist revolution as being either necessary or desirable. To some Canadian workers, the undemocratic nature of large, bureaucratic. international unions appeared to be more problematic than capitalist relations of production. Thus, the PPWC was formed in order to rebel against the lack of rank-and-file control withirr the labour movement. as opposed to the LWA. whose early leadership souyht to revolutionize the social relations of production. Accordinp to a pamphlet written by the PPWC (Pulp Paper and Woodworke~of Canada: An Introduction), "The years have not been easy ones. Our growth was fiercely opposed by the international union leaders assisted 213 by the Canadian Labour Congress." IWA Canada is affiliated with the CLC, whereas, the PPWC is affiliated with the Confederation of Canadian Unions. Althouyh there was corruption within the leadership of the International Brotherhood of Pulp, Sulphite. and Papermill Workers, this was not the main reason for the Canadian rebellion. The primary reasons for forming the PPWC were to create an independent Canadian union, and to form a union that was democratically controlled by its rank-and-file rnembers. According to former PPWC President. Anyus Macphee: We don't support Canadianism sirnply for purposes of Canadianism The constitution has to retlect itself. in our view. in control bv the membership. It's not a question of a tlag. it's not a question of chauvinism. It's a question of a structure that can mret the political needs of Canadian workers within a constitution controlled and under the intluence of the workers rather than the leadership...... For exarnple, we have no manner of trusteeing a local The locals are autonornous. We view the national union simply as an agency for the wishes of the locals. In Canadian law, the locals are the ones that hold certification and barsainhg rights for the employees. That's where the power should lie (MacPhee quoted in Marchak 1983, p. -14). The political structure of the PPWC is very different from that of the IW.4. The PPWC constitution requires elections for al1 national officen to be held each year. Al1 members are eligible to vote and voting is done by secret ballot in the workplace. The salary of the PPWC president is equal to the yearly wage of a tradesperson in the pulp and paper industry, which is approximately $55.000 to $60,000 (Worth. author interview, May 1 1, 1998). The president's salary is discontinued in the event of a work stoppage at his or her home plant. In the event that a full-tirne officer is elected to national office for five consecutive terms, they are ineligible to hold offke for a one year period. During this time, they must renim to their home miil for a year before they are again eligible to mn for 314 national office (PPWC Constitution and Policy Statements 1 996-97). The political stmcture of the union does not create an elite within the union which is insulated from the realities of the rank-and-file's work life. Funhermore. annual elections and a provision in the constitution which States that al1 national officers are subject to recall at ans time, enables the rank-and-file to exert more control over those who purport to represent their interests. than the rank-and-file of the IWA or the citizens of most parliamentary or constitutional dernocracies As ivill be discussed in the next chapter. the rank-and-file are not hesitant to use their powers of recall. Politically Diverse Leadership Unlike the Industrial Workers of the World or the early IWA. the PPWC's agenda is reformist. not radical. hlthough al1 of the national officers interviewed could al1 be characterized as politicall y progressive. they support different political panies and take different positions on various issues. Former PPWC President. Stan Shewaga expressed dissatisfaction with the NDP (New Democratic Party). which has traditionally received a high degree of suppon frorn unions, "The last provincial election as a union we supponed the NDP, rnostly because we were so damned scared of the Liberals... . that was son of the lesser of two evils. As an individual, I'm not really happy with the NDP policies, I think it would be worse under the Liberals" (Stan Shewapa. author interview. December 13. 1996). The current PPWC President, Garry Wonh. who had NDP campaign paraphernalia in his offke, expressed strong support for the NDP. "I puess it's fair to Say that I have always been left leaning in my thought. My dad was an old type socialist fella, and some of that carries over into my social vision of things 1 guess" (Garry Wonh, author interview, October 30, 1996). Worth's father was a "gyppo"' logger who ran a small logging show. Prior to going to work in the puip industry. Wonh was also a logger. Shewaga went to work in the bush full time when he was tifteen years old. Sean Reel. the National Environmental Officer. went to work as a logger after attending Carleton University for two years. He is a supporter of the Green Party. Fred Henton. the union's National Environmental Officer beyan his working career in the Canadian Navy. In the last election. he also supponed the Green Party. World View of the PPWC Rank-;ind-File The composition of the PPWC's membership müv also be a factor in why its policies regardin3 capital's exploitation of forests is fiindamentally difirent t'rom the forest policies of the Pulp. Paper. and Woodworkers of Canada. The PPWC has approximately 7,000 members. most of whom are emploved in pulpmills. The union also represents sawmill workers and some community col lrge rmployees. Conversel y. most of the IWA's membership is composed of loggers, vinually al1 of which are employed on the coast. and sawmill workers. which are distributed throughout the province. Survey research indicates that pulpmill workers express the greatest suppon for unions. followed by loggers, and then by sawmill workers. Marchak attributed the relatively hiyh suppon for unions among pulpmill worken primarily due to the greater job stability (relative to sawrnill workers and loggers) and greater opponunities for career advancement. The more democratic structure of the PPWC,relative to the IWA, was also cited as a possible reason for greater support of A gyppo logger is a person who either owns or works for a small, independent losging or trucking business. See, Beverly A. Brown, Jn Timber Coup:Wor-le's Siories of f 1995, Temple University Press. 216 unions among pulpmill workers (Marchak , 1983). The democratic structure of the PPWC gives its rank-and4 le membership greater incent ives to participate in shaping the union's policies Moreover. increased job securitv gives the workers more of a vested interest in seeking to improve the working conditions at a fixed job site. The greater allegiance that pulpmill workers have to unions combined with a more democratic political structure and political autonomy for PPWC locals, appears to have created an institution which enables new ideas and policies to emerge which challenge some of the basic assumptions of the dominant ideology. As we shall see. manv of the PPWC mrmbers who were interviewed for this project are no longer willing to assume that "experts" emploved by eithrr timber corporations or rhe state are ensuring that the present structure of the industry does not pose a threat to the physical safety of workers. the environment. or the long-term economic health of the province. Many of the concrrns of the rank-and-file have been translated into union po 1icy . A good number of the respondents who participated in this project had worked in the forest industry for three decades or more. For many of these workers. their experiences led them to have a general skepticism of al1 daims made by management level ernployees. Moreover, their direct experiences led them to be concemed with both the economic and ecoloyical sustainability of the current logging and milling practices. 1 interviewed thiny-nvo rank-and-file PPWC members for this project as well as four of the union's national otricers. These respondents were asked a battery of questions regarding their perceptions of management-employee interests. the main causes of job loss, their concems regarding safety in their work environment. their perceptions regarding the ecological impacts of current timber extraction and milling practices, and their ideas regarding how to create more forest sector jobs. In regard to the compatibility of worker's interests with capital's interests, the respondents generally expressed opinions indicating that managers would privilege corporate profits over the welfare of workers and the welfare of timber dependent communities. The interview schedule contained three questions pertaining to the interests of corporations and the interests of workers: "What are the main goals of timber corporations'?". "How do these goals differ from the goals of workers'?", and "How are company goals and the goals of workers the same'l" (See Appendix A). One rcspondent replied: "I think if union members were tnithful. they would [corporate interests and worker interests] probably be txactly the same thing. Okay, 'cause what's more econornically viable and allows the company to make more money or be more profitable in the end is probably going to be better for us as well. If it cornes that the mil1 is not profitable to run, well then they're yoiny to talk about closing it down and then al1 the union members are not going to have a job." Of al1 the answers provided by respondents, this was the only one indicating that management and workers interests are synonymous. The following quotes from three different respondents are more representative of the workers feelings regarding the degree of concern that corporations have for worken and the interests of corporations and workers: Interviewer [at end of interview]: "1s there anything else that you would like to add to this?" Respondent # I : "Yes. Just one thing, and it's a favourite of mine. Nothing pod for the worker, has ever been freely given by the employer. It's either been forced through union activity or throuyh legislation. Employer's bonom line is profit and they don? freely walk out there and hand you anything. You have to Wght for it." Respondent # 2: "They are [the interests of corporations and workers] diametrically opposed. The union. the PPWC. even in Our constitution. it says that we will try to get as many people ernployed as we can. The companies are in actual fact. well with this Hexibility. are saying, that they want as few people as they possibly can employ. for the largest amount of profit that they can generate out of those people... . .The saddest pan of that is Alex, is that, they being management, only seem to view this from the standpoint of the union people. Because thev certainlv. in my experience, have lnaded top heavy. as in management personnel and think nothing of it. the deadweight. They alwavs seem to justify the upper-management. the nonproductive individual. the ones that produce nothing per man hour put in. They are the ones that walk around that siyn the work orders. that deliver the work orders. that discipline the individuals. That supposedly have to be there to keep the troops. the rank-and-file in order. Whrther it be for fear that we as union members will run rampant or whether for fear that we may end up doing a better job and make wiser decisions than the suprrvisory personnel are capable of making. I don't know But they always do have a tendency of loading top heavy." Respondent $3: "Well. it seems that most people want to live to a ripe old age and just make enough money to have a decent living. And the goals of the companies is to have ever increasing growth. an ever increasing incorne. Sure. we'd al1 like that, we'd al1 take it if it was ot'téred. But, most of us have learned to be happy. And 1 find the companies. they're anti-personnel....The goals? That's a tough one because they're two different life forms as far as 1' m concerned." Interviewer: "The Company and the worker'?" Respondent: "Yeah. It's a machine versus a human being. . . . . lt's interesting we've got a plant manager down here and he is just constantly trying to lecture me about values. You know, hearing that from this puy who has been in town for eight months, 1 have a hard time. 1 get sick every time 1 talk to the guy. He keeps telliny me about values, fmily values too. Oh man. ifs terrible, how this guy soes on about 'I'rn a family man. 1 believe in the farnily.' Yeah, okay. well, why are you doing seventy people with families out of work?" The national officen interviewed for this project appeared to share the opinions of the rank- and-file members reyardiny the conflictiny interests of capital and labour: In the global market, you've ptinvestors. If they get a retum on investments, they don't care if its in tobacco or armaments or forests. So, if they're getting what they want, on their return from forests, fine. who cares leave it there. If they don't get that retum. they're going to take their money elsewhere. The people that are working, earning big salaries in corporations. don't want to see that happen ...CEO's get two or three million bucks a year. so. if your conscience ever stans to creep into your mind. you've got a big pay cheque to take care of that altogether. So. the companies interests are makins money. I mean. I'm not saying they're bad people. thev're probablv wonderful people. but what they do and what the system does is wrong (Sean Red, author interview, July 9, 1997). Fred Henton, the union's Environmental OKcer commented: I would have to say that corporations in yenerül. they have a mandate and a responsibility to their shareholders and to makr profit. . . 1 tliink that today there are very tèw corporations that are people oriented and do a whole lot for their employees. Wliether it's the auto workers or the forestry workers. or the pulp workers ...computrr companies or whatever (Fred Henton. author interview. luly 17. 1997). As discussed in the chapter on rhe corporate discourse (chapter four), one of the goals of corporate propaganda is to convince workers that the interests of timber capitalists and rank-and-file workers are synonymous. Obviously. the majority of the respondents in this study do not accept this proposition. Most of the objections to industry reforms publicly raised by timber capitalists gertain to how these reforms will affect rank-and4 le workers. Thus, an individual whose perceptions of timber corporations is primarily based upon the popular media and/or corporate propayanda, may form the impression that corporations operate in their employee's best interest and that the interests of workers and management are compatible. In contrast to the seneral public. many of the respondenü had worked for large timber corporations for thirty years or more and thus had experienced. on numerous occasions, the contradictions between corporate r hetoric and practice. These life experiences have likely made the respondents more sceptical of the daims made by corporations than the general public. According to the union's Forestry Officer, Sean Reel: If you have a union person and a non-union person reading a press releasc frorn a corporation. you will have two cornpletely different interpretations. Anyone who has ever worked for a corporation will read completely between thc lincs and givc you a full translation of idiat tliry 'in sayiriy. Tlir other person. the public will accept what's written on the page (Sean Reel. author inteoriew. July 7, 1998). The perceptions of the workers were not solely based on direct experience. During the interview process and informal discussions before and after the local union meetings. it became apparent that many of the respondents tiad thought a lot about and/or read a great deal about the issues in question. Xtany cimes PPWC niernbers either made reference to books on labour issues or recommended that 1 read certain works (e.g..Tattam and Lembke's ne Union in Wood. Michael Moore's Downsize Thiq!, Jeremy Rifiin's The End of Work , and (liinadlan Dima).Therefore, the respondents also based their world view on wriiten works which resonated with their direct experiences. The direct experiences of PPWC members also played a major role in undermining the credibility of the Forest Alliance and other corporate front groups. The lack of support for the Forest Alliance amony PPWC members appears to be strongly influenced by former IWA President Jack Munro's association with that organization. While President of IWA Canada, Munro cultivated a reptation among PPWC memben as a self-servinp negotiator who was willing io break ranks with other labour leaders and make coven deals with management. An article in the Victoria Times Colonist alleged that while Munro was President of the IWA. he, "cut a deal with the corporate bosses, agreeing to massive and permanent job losses in exchange for hiyher pay to the few remaininy human skills" (m Times Colonu July 30, 1993, p. A 5). While it is dificult to verify the specifics of negotiations that have transpired behind closed doors, the results of these negotiations are quite tangible: between 1980 and 1995. there was a forty three percent decline in IWA membership (Marchak 1995. p. 99). Stan Shewaga, the recently retired President of the PPWC cornmented. "If anybody with any common sense just followed Jack's history. that should have a tendency to discredit him. The goddamn guv is nothing but a traitor to the working class" (Stan Shewqa. author interview. December 13. 1996). Sean Rrel. the PPWC's National Forest- Officer had a somewhat different assessrnent of Munro. In his opinion, it isn't accurate to say that Munro betrayed the working class as he never had a social conscience. "Was Jack hlunro a traitor'? Well. I don't think so. because really. if vou understand what the good fight is, how could you leave it'?" (Reel. author interview. My9. Most of the rank-and-file workers knew that the Forest Alliance is a corporate financed oganization, but their strongest objection to the organization appeared to be that Jack Munro is its chairman. Many of the interviewees used the term "traitor" to describe Munro or other similar adjectives. One respondent provided the following anecdotes: We've dealt with Munro before on strike issues and things, and he has just absolutely cut our throats.. . ..fiveor six contracts ago, al1 three unions were going out on strike and the night before we went on strike. he went in and signed an agreement with the companies. It was al1 in writiny. We were going to shut the forest indusuy down in B.C. and settle some thinys that had been bitiny us for years. And he went in, the night before, on his ow, I guess with a couple of his henchmen. and sold the pulp companies out. He went in and siyned a contract... . The same respondent also told the following story: .... one of our locals, Our hotel, it was Local 6. Our hotel they were negotiating in Nanaimo, and they were picketing in Nanaimo, okay. the IWA had a convention ....and one of the girls on the picket line went for a linle walk down the Street as she was picketing and (laughs) she caught hlunro sneaking in the back door! Now that tells the whole story of Jack Munro. okay?! The respondents were less familiar with the corporate financed, pseudo-grassroots movement Share BC. Twenty-four of the thiny-two rank-and-file PPWC mrmbers either stated that they had never heard of Share groups or that they didn't know much about the organization. The most favourable statement regarding Share goups was made by one respondent who stated that Sliare is. "a middle of the road type group. 1 don't think it's too biased either way*" Which is definitely consistent with the way Share portrays itself in its own literaturr. Other respondents who were familiar with Share stated that it was a corporate financed organization with ties to the Forest Alliance. National PPWC President. Garry Worth cornmented: ". .1don't have much sympathy for the Share groups... . they're just straight mouthpieces for the corporations. They 're straight corporate line....No( only that. I have some news clippings . some information that they were hooked into the Moonies..in the United States... . .Patrick Armstrong 1 think was the name..." (Author interview. October 30. 1996). The PPWC newspaper, lhe LrujZlrr also ran an article criticking the corporate backing and political activities of Share groups in BC (TheVol. 28. #1 January 28, 1989, p. 1). However, corporate front groups do have some influence within the ranks of the PPWC. The Soo Coalition for Sustainable Forests. which is also a corporate front group (see appendices 3 and 4) is a relatively new oqanization. Only two respondents out of a total of 223 thiny-six PPWC members in the sample were familiar with the oqanization. Local Three of the PPWC is reportedly a member of the Soo Coalition. The two people who had heard of the Soo Coalition were both from this local and both of them stated that they suppon the Soo Coalition. The same two individuals who expressed suppon for the Soo Coalition, which contributes money to the Forest Alliance (Appendices D and E). had negative ihings to sav about the Forest Alliance due to its corporate backing and Jack Munro's affiliation with that organization. One of these respondents commented. "Jack can never be tnisted. he really hosed us good" (author interview). Thus. while it is apparent that corporate front proups are generally distnisted among the respondents interviewed for this project. there is also some evidence which indicates that they have achieved a degrre of credibilitv amon- some of the workers. As discussed in chapter four, anothrr goal of corporate propaganda is to convince worken that environmentalists and environmental reforms are the main threats to their jobs. The data gathered from the interviews indicate that the millworkers do not consider environmental reforms to be among the major threats to job security. The national officers identified factors other than environmental reforms. such as mechaniration, full flexibility management systems, and contractiny out work to nonunion businesses as serious threats to job security. The rank-and-file PPWC members were asked questions from a standardized interview schedule. One of the questions in the standardized interview questionnaire was. "What are some of the major threats to jobs in the forest industry?" (See appendix A). Most of the respondents discussed several factors which they considered to be threats to job security. The most common responses were modemization, foreiyn cornpetition, over- 224 cutting, full flexibility, and contracting out. Capital mobility and exponing raw logs were also concerns. It can be assumed that the tint answer which occurs to an individual, is likely to be the factor which they consider to be the most important issue regarding job security. Fony percent of the thirty-two rank-and-file respondents Rrst answer to the question was increased mechanization of the industry. Sixteen percent of the sarnple's initial response was foreign corn petit ion. another sixteen percent answered over-cutting of forests. Eight percent of the respondent's initial reply was full flexibiiity. In reply to the above question. riow of the respondents listed environmental reforms. such as the creation of protected areas as a threat to job security. hlthough later in the interview, one respondent did state that he considered the environmental movement to be a threat to forest sector jobs. Thest: findinys are consistent with the tindings of Thomas Dunk, who conducted open endrd interviews with losgers in nonhwestern Ontario. According to Dunk, "None of 45 loggers interviewed blamed environmentalists for the dismal state of the forest industry..." (Dunk 1994, p. 16). However, as will be discussed in chapter eiyht, not blaming environmentalists for job loss, does not necessarily mean that forest sector workers identify with environmentalists or sympathize with their goals. Another daim made by timber capitalists and corporate front groups is ihat contemporary logging and milliny practices are sustainable and pose no threat to worker's health or ecological diversity. Again it will be argued that the direct experiences of many of the workers tended to undermine the validity of these daims. Of the thirty-two rank and file PPWC members interviewed, When asked the question, " In the work place. what are some of the greatest threats to your health and physical safety?" twenty-seven individuals, or 84 percent. stated that chemicals, like chlorine gas were still a major concem despite changes in safety regulations. Several of the interviewees reponed having been accidentally exposed to chlorine sas while on the job. During a PPWC strike in summer 1997, two management level employees died as a result of exposure to nitrogen gas while doing maintenance work in a Fletcher Challenge rnill. While there are many immediate dangers in the work place, most of the workers interviewed were more concerned with the long-term effects of chronic exposure to toxic chemicals. Tim ber capital ists have responded to workers' concerns regarding chernical exposure by bringing in "experts" to convince the rank-and-file that their fears are unwarranted One worker, who had been working for MacMillan-Bloedel since the earlv 1960s recounted numerous occasions over the years when the company had attempted to mislead workers regarding the potential health hazards of the chemicals util ized in sawmills and pulp mills: I've already yot bums on my hands from the chemicals they're putting on the lumber. They'll never tell us the truth about what they're putting on the lumber. I went through a course ...the company told us how safe it was. they brouyht in a lab person and they Say this and this ....and five years later they cal1 it "deadly poison." I sat riyht there and 1 argued. 1 said. "Who do you work for dear?" Because it was a woman. "Oh, I work for M and B in their research lab." So. 1 said. "So, you're going to tell us if it is killing us or not?" [She said] "Oh yes, I would." And then this guy. he was a summer student [a university student working in the mil1 for the summer], he started naming parts per million and he lost us ail, eh? Our meeting was over in exactly 1 1 minutes and the other ones had at least an hour. Because he knew too much, eh? ..A really don't think they give a shit about the chemicals. The few times 1 worked up at the pulpmill, they dumped green lacquer into the ocean. They said, "Oh, shit we'll take the fine. It's only a $25.000 fine... A's cheaper than trying to get it tmcked out of there to get rid of it ....We had an accidental spill last night. Well. 1 bloody well know it wasn't no accident. They let her go... .right into the ocean (author interview). Another worker, who is currently on disability leave due to physical problems which he attributes to exposure to toxic chemicals in the workplace, expressed Iiis frustration and anger toward the Company for endangering the welfare of its employees and the public. and for failing to accept responsibility for the social problems they have caused. 1 have what's called Rads Reactionary Dysfunction Syndrome. I've been exposed to chemicals a few different times and thev still don't want to take ownership of the problem. 1 go before the WCB al1 the time and it's just a major battle. They send their lawyers there to make it p the other direction. And they know that they've caused the problem, but they don't take ownership of it. The gas goes out and they don't inform people, and they've been wrote up numerous times. And if you went through a "Stop" sign as many times as they've let gas go out into the atmosphere. you'd be in jail and you'd be bunked up with Clifford Olsen.' But these people think they can get away with it and pet away with it. and that's the way it is (author intewiew) Fred Henton, the PPWC's national Environmental Officer, also contended that despite improvements in safety replations, pulpmill workers continue to work in a highly toxic environment. The evidence is there, regardless of how you try to twist it around, the worker in the pulp and paper industry is far more susceptible to a wide variety of illnesses. Althouyh we can't positively pin it down, 1 can only give you an example, in the last ten years, L have personally known 15-20 people that have died of cancer in the pulp and paper industry. If you took that on a ratio of population. and stopped somebody on the Street and asked them. "How many people do you know personally in the last ten years who have died of cancer?'; 1 don't think that the figures would be as high (Henton, author interview, Jul y 1 7. 1997). Unlike loggers, many pulpmill workers have directly experienced the adverse consequences of exposure to toxic chemicals or they have personally known CO-workerswho have health problerns related to chernical exposure. Thus, the consequences of environmentai ' Clifford Olsen is a prison inmate who was convicted of murdering numerous children in British Columbia. 227 degradation are very tangible and persona!. Prior to extracting tim ber from a given area, a loyger may never have seen that particular forest before nor are they likely to retum to the area once it has been logged. Hence. the logger generally does not develop a long-term relationship with his or her logging site. When the individual does not have prolonged contact with a given area, perhaps it is easier to accept arguments that the clearcuts are just temporary disturbances of the forest eco-systems. When an individual has worked in the same mil1 for years and an alarrning number of their co-workers suffer from diseases which appear to have some relationship to the toxic workplace environment. some of the lonb-1 term consequences of corporate practices become more transparent. Moreover. many of the workers interviewed felt that they had been intentionally deceived by timber corporations. The wide disparity between the claims made by timber corporations and the direct experience of many of the workers tends to undermine the prrrctl credibility of timber capitalists. Hence, many of the workers interviewed were very sceptical regarding claims bv timber capitalists that timber was being extracted in a sustainable and ecologically responsible manner. As will be discussed in the next chapter. many of the older workers remernbered Greenpeace's earlier campaigns regarding smokestack emissions and the release of pulprnill ef'fluents into the ocean and rivers. Thus. through long-term experience with both institutions, some of the workers have corne to consider environmental organizations such as Greenpeace to be a more reliable source of information than timber corporations. In regard to forestry issues, persona1 research, direct experience, and a generalized disnst of timber corporations led many of the rank-and-file workers to doubt that current forestv practices are either economically or ecologically sustainable. Of the thirty-two rank and file members which I interviewed, three workers or 9 percent of the total, stated that the current AAC (annual allowable cut) is sustainable. Nine, or 28 percent of the total, indicated that they were not certain whether or not it is sustainable. Almost half of the respondents (47 percent), stated that the current AAC is not sustainable. Some of the individuals interviewed stated that they had seen information based on MoF data indicating that the AAC is not sustainable others based their opinion primarily on their direct experience Respondent I : No. [the current AAC is not sustainable] But if you go over the timber supply review documentation, they also have economic, socio- economic, ....documents in there and they also take that into account in their reviews It's also weighted quite heavily on that. Charnber of Commerce, people like ihat are involved. So. thev do weight it quite heavily in regards to that. .... in the long term, no. there is no way [that the AAC is sustainable] even up here. because, we're taking out trees that are 250 or 300 years old and they are replacing them with trees that are going to be 80 years old. They might be able to replace the volume, but they aren't going to be able to replace the quality of the wood. Respondent 2: 1 know from what 1 have seen, the stuff that has been replanted, in twenty and thiny years aso, they still aren't harvesting. lt's a very long stretch between when the stuff is planted and when it can be harvested again. So, ah. and, that's one of the main reasons 1 doit personally think it's sustainable and that coupled with the amount of cut that there is each year ... Well, I guess you flew in to Prince George, eh'? Interviewer: "No, 1 drove up." Respondent 2 : Yeah. Well, I've flown in to Vancouver on union business a few times in the last year and 1 was surprised ai the amount when you look down from the plane that is cut, until you get in to the Coastal Mountains when you're crossing them, there is not as much of the clearcuts, but when you get up towards here, it's just a checkerboard. Interviewer: "Are the current logging practices sustainable?" Respondent 3: "No. Not right now. 1 think it's weighed a little heavy in the take out end. I mean, there are a lot of pulpmills in this province.. ..And pulpmiiis go through a lot of trees, 1 don't think that the average penon realizes it. When you watch a continuous digester just tuming chips into pulp, 1 mean , you're watching acres disappear, you know. its amating how much we use .....Oh, you just watch these chips go through and fisure thern into a tree, it's just like a, it's huge! ...... There's not enough forest... I rnean they've done the island pretty well top to bottom..and now they want to do the outlying islands, ... you look around at signs .replanted in 'SS', they're as big around as your am, you know? or your leg maybe, that's just not good cnough ..... I'vc floun ovcr this whole province and it's, ah, tliare is a lot of empty areas in there. you know? And I don't think they'll ever, 1 shouldn't say ever, because tliat 's a long tirne, in my time I don? think these valieys will be back to where they were." The national officers also expressed doubts regarding the sustainabilitv of current forestry practices. Recently retired PPWC President. Stan Shewaga contended that in the long mn, partial cutting methods are in the best interest of forest sector workers. 1 think that our position has always been in favour of selective logging. It makes a whole lot of sense. When 1 was a kid, working in the bush, you'd see al1 of the wood left in the woods that couid be utilized. It's criminal for God's sake...People who support clearcuts, I'm talkiny about trade union people, are really takiny a short-term view of it. Eventually, once you're out of fibre, you're going to lose those jobs in any event. 1 think it makes more sense to try to control the issue with sound environmental practices. They're not only ping to provide jobs but a sound atmosphere to live in. You cm do both of those things if you do it intelligently. But unfortunately, the larse corporations, whether forest companies or any other kind of corporations, their bottom line is quick profits (Shewaga, author interview, December 13, 1996). Garry Worth. the current President of the PPWC, expressed some hope that enough of the second yrowth forests would reach a point at which it is commercially viable to extract timber from them before the available, commercially viable old growth forests are gone (author interview, October 30, 1996). In contrast, Sean Reel, the National Forest Officer is thoroughly convinced that the present AAC is not sustainable and that in the next ten to fifieen years, many mills will be closed (Sean Reel, author interview, Iuly 7, 1998). Fred Henton, the National Environmental Officer. believes that there is not enough objective information available on the subject to form an opinion: 1 think it's questionable [whether or not the current AAC is sustainable].. . .I don't think there has been a debate, an accountability If industry really is over cutting, how much are they over cutting? If there are areas that they shouidn't have been cuttiny in, and they are cuttiny in, and they Say they haven't been cutting in, what are those areas? How much damage has been done to the environment. to the streams. to the potential salmon stock? It's cenainly a burning issue with the fisherman's union. So. I think there has to be an independent accounting. outside of industry, outside of government. outside of the environmentalists, because. the parallel I draw is you have the Council of Forest Industries on one side saying. 'Everything is warm and fuzzy and we can go on forever and just keep cutting the way we are cutting and not decrease ' And then on the othar side you have people like Eanh First. So. somewhere in the middle, there has to be a balance (Fred Henton. author interview, July 17. 1997). Unless propasanda is some how at least panially reinforced by the everyday experiences of the intended audience. it is very unlikely to have the intended etfect. The corPorate propayanda regarding the sustainability of the current tirnber extraction practices does not appear to resonate with the direct experiences of many forest sector workers. In farming communities there may be local families who can remember harvestiny crops from the same piece of land for several generations. However, in northern climates like B.C. where trees must reach approximately 100 years of aye to be commercially viable, and second growth forests must remain undisturbed a yreat deal longer before they begin to resemble an old growth forest eco-systems, one yeneration is very unlikely to extract timber from the same area which was clearcut by the generation which proceeded it. Even Patrick Moore, who makes his living as a public relations representative for timber corporations, does not direcrly make the daim that the same area can be dearcut generation after generation: Today 1 can walk through forests where rny grandfather clearcut logged 60 and 70 years ago and if it weren't for the presence of rotting, moss covered stumps you would never know it had once been cleared. The new forest is so lush and full of shrubs and ferns that al1 evidence of disturbance has been removed. Bears, wolves, coupars. ravenss and al1 the other forest-dwellers roam thcre. The treee are straiplii and iall and although they have not yet reached the great size of some of their predecessors they form a dense and prowing cover on land once cleaned bare. The marvel of this renewal is that it took place entirely on its own. There had been no thought given to reforestation or any other aspect of restoration. Nature has regenerated almost in spite of human disturbance and is rapidly returning to its original condition (Moore 1995. p. 5). In regard to how current logging practices affect wildlife there was a great deal of variance among the thinv-ovo rank-and-file union members One likel y reason for this is that logging creates conditions favourable to the survival of some species as well as conditions which result in the elimination or decline of other species. Moreover. clearcutting destroys the cover available to many species. thus making them more visible to humans. When asked the question, "Do current losging practices present a threat to wildlife?", twenty-two of the rank-and-file interviewees, or 69 percent. indicated that the manner in which logging is currently being conducted posed a threat to wildlife. Seven interviewees, or 22 percent, indicated that logging did not present a threat to wildlife One of these seven contended that logging "improved" wildlife habitat. Three interviewees, or 9 percent, indicated that they were not certain about the impacts of logging on wildlife. Several interviewees also reponed that due to new environmental regulations regarding the discharge of pulpmill emuents into None of these are old growth dependent species. For a cornparison of a 90 year old second growth forest and an old growth forest, see photos in chapter five. 232 oceans and rivers. they had personally rvitnessed noticeable improvernent in water quality and that they had seen salmon return to streams that had previously been too polluted for them to spawn. What different individuals deduce from direct experience cm Vary greatly, even if the situations that two individuals with opposing views are exposed to are very similar. During the interview process. i t became apparent that respondents used very different indicators to determine the ecological health of the forests. Furthermore. which qualities of a forest an individual considers to be desirable. varies yreatly between individuals. For instance. one interviewee indicated that clearcuts create more browse t'or deer, which increased the deer population. which in turn gave him more game to hunt. Thus, clearcuts were desirable. Another interviewee stated that clearcutting upset the forests ecological balance by increasing the deer population, wtiich led to an increase in the cougar population, which in tum increased the risk that he or his wife would be attacked by a cougar while jogging on trails through the forest. It is also important to note that some of the benefits of clearcutting to early successional species like deer tend to be short-term. Some interviewees contended that clearcutting did not pose a threat to ecological diversity because they had seen increased deer populations and moose moving into areas where they had never been before. In the short- term, clearcuts do create more browse for deer and moose. Thus, which species an individual uses as an indicator of ecological health affects their perception reyarding the impacts of clearcutting. Clearcutting creates habitat favourable to early successional species, eg.,deer. which do not have unique habitat requirements and desuoys the habitat of late successional, or old growth dependent species, e.g., woodland caribou, spotted owl, and species, e.g., yriuly bear. which need large tracts of undisturbed land (Binkley, 1997). In the shori term, clearcutting does increase the browse available for species like deer, roosevelt elk, and moose, which in turn leads to a temporary population increase. Once snow covers the clearcut area, the new food source is buried. This causes the deer, etc., to enter the remaining forested areas. Due to their increased numbers. damage the plant and animal life of the forest (Hammond 1992, p. 9 I ). Thus, while a majority of the respondents indicated that current logging practices did adversely affect forest eco-systems. the varying indicators used to measure the ecological health of the forests. different ideas regardin3 what qualities in a forest eco-system are most desirable. and conflicting information available from timber companies, environmental organizations and government agencies. are al1 factors which produce a variety of perceptions regarding the ecological impacts of current forestry practices. As discussed earlier, the IWA's leadership appears to be attempting to alleviate the effects of capital's increased exploitation of labour by joining capital in its attempts to increase its exploitation of nature. When asked the question, "What do you feel should be done to ensure the security of jobs in the forest sector?", none of the PPWC respondents gave answers, e.g., logging provincial parks, increasing the annual allowable cut (AAC), which would indicate that they believed that increasing capital's exploitation of nature was a viable solution to job loss and declining wages and benefits. Many of the responses to the above question did indicate that the respondents felt that the govemment has both the right and the obligation to interfere with the free enterprise system in order to 234 irnprove the worker's quality of life. Nine of the respondents, or 28 percent, First response was either a reduction of work hours or the elimination of over-time work hours. Seven, or 22 percent, initial response was value added manufacturing. Five or 16 percent, stated that corporate access to tirnber should be contingent on job creation. Five or 13 percent. indicated that due to changing circumstances. e.g..global corn petition, job loss was inevitable and there was not much that could be done to prevent it. Two respondents. or 6 percent. indicated that employee training could help prevent job loss. Another respondent stated that the pvernment should expropriate cutting rights from corporations and that the timber industry should be pubiicly owned and controlled. Otie respondent stated that sustainable logginy was the key to protecting jobs. Another respondent advocated internat ional labour standards so that B.C. workers would not have to conipete with non-union low wage workers, and one respondent indicated that increased mechanization would bener enable workers to compete in the international market, thus ensuring that mills would remain open. Oficial Policy Statements of the PPWC As evidenced by the data which was detailed above. PPWC members have a multitude of concerns regarding how the practices of timber corporations are affectiny the health and w.4- being of forest sector worken and forest eco-systems. The officia1 policy statements of the PPWC articulates some of these concerns. However, the union's field of concem is not limited to the well being of forest sector workers and forests, over the past three decades, the union has made official policy statements on a wide range of issues, from calling on the Canadian govemment to aid the Nicaraguan Sandinista government to issuing a statement opposing, "the work of the Ku Klux Klan and to any from of racial discrimination" (PPWC 1996-97, p. 33). Due to the nature of their work. PPWC members are perhaps more aware than other woodworkers. such as loggers who are exposed to relativelv few toxic chemicals, of the hazards of releasing toxins into the air and water. This has led the PPWC to issue policy statements calling for a total ban on the manufacturing of chlorine based products and restrictions on the production of chemicals associated with acid rain (PPWC 1996-97). Concerns regarding the sustainability of current forestry practices and broader concerns regardin3 environmental quality have led the PPWC to take a fairly progressive stance on forestry issues. In 1988. the PPWC issued the following policv statement: "The PPWC cal1 for the preservation of wilderness area such as the Stein River Valley. Khutzevmateen Valley, and other distinctive areas in B.C. Any tinal decision by the provincial government on the future of the Stein Valley recognize the ancestral and cultural importance to the Lytton and Mt. Currie Indian bands" (PPWC 1996-97). The union's forest policy. mkTrees~nd US advocates the wider use of partial cutting techniques. The publication contends that, "We need a whole lot less clearcutting, and a lot more partial cutting and selective logginy. We need strict iimits on the sire of clearcuts. We need to limit the damage caused by unnecessary road building" (PPWC 1993, p. 7). The pamphlet also uses Merv Wilkinson's woodlot near Ladysmith, B.C. as a model of how to create more jobs in the extraction phase of production while causing less ecoloyical damage, by using partial cutting methods. Merv Wilkinson, who is currently in his eiyhties, began using partial cutting methods on his woodlot in the 1930s. Wilkinson maintains that he has managed to extract timber from his land without upsetting the ecological balance of the forest. Furthermore, Wilkinson contends that he currently has more board feet of timber on his propeny than when he began selectively logginy it in the 1930s (see, Times Colonist October 10, 1997 and Globe and Mail October 17, 1997). Although seeking to improve the environmental quality of both the work site as well as the overall environmental quality are clearly aspects of the PPWC's agenda, decreasing capital's esploitation of its mernbership is the organization's raison d'etrg. There are several underlying assumptions implicit in the PPWC's policies regarding the exploitation of land and labour. One of these assumptions is that it is desirable to have pubiicly owned and controiled natural resources and that the primary reason for allowing private intrrests to have access to pub1 icly owned resources is to create jobs for Canadian workers. In other words. if private interests are given access to publicly owned resources, then the public has the right to demand the maximum possible social benefits from this transaction. Furihermore, the state has the right and the obligation to interfere with the market in order to ensure that the public's weifare is privileged over the welfare of private corporations. Another irnplicit assumption is that there are natural limits regarding the amount of raw material which is available for production. Thus, in order to ensure that forest sector jobs exist in the future. the state has the obligation to prevent capital from destroying its production conditions. Moreover, due to the limited amount of raw materials, the state has the obligation to implement changes which create more jobs without increasing the amount of natural resources utilized during the production process. These underlying assumptions are reflected in many of the PPWC's policy statements6: 1971 Convention Policy Sta tement: "The convention strongl y urge the federal government of Canada and the provincial sovernment of B.C. to bring fonh legislation to prevent expon of raw materials which can he processed in this country with the aim of attaining zero unemployment and continuous expansion of our national economy." 1971 Convention Policy Statement "The Pulp. Paper and Woodworkers of Canada strongly protest to both the provincial and federal governments the practice of cunailiny operations of Canadian subsidiaries of forrign- owned companies for economic reasons. while their counterparts in the US.maintain full production wi th the assistance of raw and semi-processed material shipped from Canada " 1982 Convention Policy Statement "The PPWC urges the provincial and federal governments to insist that the forest industry take a greater responsibility in replanting and farming this diminishiny resource." 1984 Convention Policy Statement "The PPWC oppose the BC government's intention of turning over control and management of tree farm licences to individual forest companies." 1987 Convention Policy Stntement "The PPWC cal1 for the implementation of a sound forest management strategy including: rnonies collecteci from the recently instituted Softwood Lurnber Products Expon Charge Act be used for immediate and massive reforestation programs to reclaim the not satisfactorily . . The source for al1 of these policy statements is The PPWC Co- Poli= -: -: 1994-95 PPWC:Vancouver, B.C. restocked land in Our country; a ban on the export of raw and semi-processed wood products and development of secondary. foresr based industries; to maintain and create jobs for Canadian workers through public ownership and control of our natural resources." 1989 Convention Policy Stitement "The PPWC dlon the CPC and the ICVA to draft coiiiiiioii cleriiands tu rewise ttic: provincial government's proposai to give private industry uninhibited conirol of public forest resources, stop expon of raw logs and chips, as well as over cutting and misrnanagement of BC forest resources." 1994 Convention Policy Statement "The PPWC cal1 for the pvernment to ban al1 expons of raw logs. including cants and chips. and that the BC government invest much more money in industry-manning, value added products (secondary forestry industry) suc h as furniture, homes, home packages. windows, doors. consumer products etc.. which could create more jobs in BC and enhance jobs for Canadians overall." 1995 Policy Statement "The PPWC rnake it their policy and strongly urge the Ministry of Forests that any increase to the allowable annual cut or forest tenure be awarded only to those cornpanies who make subsiantial improvements in finishing forest products in British Columbia." Decreasing Exploitation Through Reduced Work Hours Reducing the work week as a means of reducing capital's exploitation of workers is one of the oldest tactics utilized by the labour movement and it has been one of the official policies of the PPWC for over two decades (PPWC 1996-97, p. 10). What has chan~ed,to sorne degree within the labour movrment, are the arguments that are utilized in favour of reducing work hours. The PPWC's newspaper, The Le& recently featured an article which conflated traditional labour movement arguments for a shorter work week with arguments put forth by academics and activists (e.g.,Hammond 1992, p. 48; Pepper pp. 96- I O 1 ) which question the ecological sustainabiiity of perpetual economic growth. The article beyins by discussiny how reduciny the work week has been used in the past to address unemployment and quotes Samuel Gompers, who was the American Federation of Labor's President in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. "So long as there is one who seeks work and cannot find it. the hours of work are too long." The article goes on to question the neo-liberal aryurnent7 that economic growth is a panacea for addressing social problems like poverty and unemployment. "Uncontrolled growth has vastly magnified the Greenhouse Effect. Scientists are predicting that half the world's ocean beaches will be tlooded... . huye swiithes of forest land will be destroyed bv a combination of forest tÏres. insect plagues. and disease; weather will becornr more extreme and unpredictable ....growth is a suicide machine rather than a vehicle to full employment" (The Leaflei. Vol. 34, #3 AprilMay 1997. p. 3). Thus. a reduced work week is seen as a means of creating more jobs without increasing the environmental impact of production. Labour organizer. Larry Martel contends that a reduced work week is a means for environmental organizations and labour unions who have been at loggerheads for findins common ground. In regard to the IWA blockade of the Greenpeace ship, Martel assened: The IWA is right. Union loggers deserve their jobs at current or better wages, benefits and working conditions without any layoffs! Greenpeace is right. There needs to be an ancient-gowth clearcutting moratorium. Both aims are compatible (- Di- September-October 1997. p. 33). Unfortunately, neither the IWA nor Greenpeace have officially advocated a reduced ' For instance, see for instance the TriLateral Commission's of the World's Eco0p. 79. 240 work week. However. a coalition of environmental orgmizations. Environrnentalists for Shorter Work Time Network of Canada. is seeking to address both forrns of capitalist exploitation via a shoner work week. Two out of the three woodworkers unions in B.C. (CEP and PPWC)also advocate a reduced work week. Thus, a reduction in work hours is another issue (e.g., value added manufacturing, sustainable logging) which may appeal to both camps, which in turn creates the potential for joint political actions. Mutation of the Liibour Movement As discussed in the previous chapter. Alain Touraine (Touraine. 1988) maintains that both capitalists and workers share similar cultural orientations. For the most pan. this assertion appears to be correct; however, as evidenced by the data presented above. some actors within the labour movement are beginning to question the logic of perpetual economic growth. For a long time. economic yrowth has been viewed positively by both the labour movement and the capitalisi class, as economic growth was considered a rneans of increasing the overall wealth available to society. Mainstream labour activists sought to increase the portion of available material wealth allotted to the working class. As stated in the PPWC policy statements detailed above, one of the union's goals was to advocate policies that resulted in the "continuous expansion" of the Canadian economy. lncreasing the productive capacity of capitalist society was also viewed as desirable by radical labour activists. Once the transfer to socialism was complete, the leyacy of the capitalist class would be the creation of an industrial infrastructure which enabled the people of the world to harness nature in a rnanner which produced an abundance of wealth for ail. [t is the historic mission of the working class to do away with capitalism. The army of production must be organized. not only for the everyday stnggle with capitalists, but also io carry on production when capitalism shall be overthrown. By organizing industrially we are forming the structure of the new society within the shell of the old (Preamble of the 1. W.W. 1908. quoted in Litwack 1962, p. 13). In the first half of the twentieth century. capitalism's tendency to concentrate vast amounts of wealth into the hands of the few. led some members of the working class (e.g.. the Industrial Workers of the World) to conclude that a socialist revolution was necessary. In the second half of the twentieth century. due to a combination of government repression and Keynesian economic reforms. radical labour activists tvere replaced by more moderate labour activists. By the 1960s. it appeared to some B.C. labour activists (i.e..those who formed the PPWC) that the most important strupgle was addressing the undemocratic structure withirl the labour movernent. Thus, there is evidence that as the environment in which social movements exist changes, some social actors and social movements mutate in order to adapt to these changes. In the twilight of the twentieth century, some labour activists have concluded that one of the most urgent social problems is capital's over-exploitation of external nature. At the beginning of this century. both the capitalist class and the working class believed that technological change and economic yrowth were the key to material prosperity. Social actors in the contemporary labour movement are increasingly aware of the limited capacity of natural resources to reproduce themseives and the adverse consequences of over-exploitiny these resources. The changing perceptions arnong labour activists reflect both tangible physical changes in the global environment and a shift in public perception regarding environmental issues. The physical environment of labour activists in the early twentieth century was very different than the physical environment of labour activists in the late twentieth century. It was not until after World War 11 that the global hurnan population exceeded 2 billion. The current global hurnan population is just under 6 billion. However. the explosion of the global human population was only one factor that contributed to the present ecological crisis. Increases in the use of chemical fertil izers, herbicides, pesticides. and fossil fuels as well as a rapid increase in per capita consumption of resources in First World nations have been identitïed as having a greater environmental impact than population growth (Foster 1994. pp. II44 15) The positions taken by environmentai activists have also evolved throuphout the twentieth century. At the turn of the century, the primary debate within the environmental movement was between "conservationists", like Theodore Roosevelt who advocated the "wise use" of natural resources in order to ensure that they were renewable and that capitalists were able to receive the maximum possible return on their investments and "preservationists" like John Muir and Aldo Leopold who beiieved that al1 species have an intrinsic worth and the right to exist. thus a certain amount of wilderness must be "preserved" (Foster 1994, pp. 74-76). Neither the "preservationists" nor the "conservationists" questioned the social relations of production. As discussed in chapter one, there are currently several different theoretical orientations, i.e., social ecology, socialist ecology, eco-Mamist feminism, which provide a critique of both capital's exploitation of labour and nature. Eco-socialists, have very explicitly detailed the limitations of environrnentalism which fails to address capital's exploitation of labour (e.g., Foster, 1 993). In British Columbia, environmental organizations (e-g., Greenpeace, Western Canada 243 W i ldemess Cornmittee, the Valhalla Society), have recognized the futi lity of preserving a few pristine areas without addressing capital's exploitation of labour. This has led environmental groups to advocate more value added production and sustainable logging practices. There are some environmental organizations, eg.the Nature Conservancy, which have formed alliances with timber companies via the Forest Alliance. There are also some unions. e.g..the 1W.4, which have also formed alliances with timber companies via the Forest -4lliance. However, the positions taken by the IW.4 cannot be considered representative of the views of forest sector workers any more than the positions and actions of the Nature Conservancy can be considered representative of the views of the environmental community In recent years. the PPWC and Greenpeace have taken very similar positions on many issues regardiny B.C.'sforest industry It has been argued that the policies of both organizations have evolved to adapt to the rapid increasc in capital's exploitation of land and labour. In the next chapier. it will be shown how common concems and policies have led to some joint actions and increased communication between these two organizations. General barriers to a labour-environmentalkt alliance will be discussed as well as specific characteristics of Greenpeace and the PPWC that impede the ability of these two organizations to fom stronger ties. CFiAPTER EIGBT COMMON GROUND AND CONFLICT "Everyune knuws thefnlldown is cuming...... " Sean Reel, PPWC's Natiunal Furestry (Vficer We have seen in the last two chapters that there is a large degree of consensus between Greenpeace and the Pulp. Paper, and Woodworkers of Canada (PPWC)regarding the nature of the problems with the presrnt structure of the forest industry and what reforms are necessary and desirable. However. as will be detailed below. a cenain degree of overlap in values and goals does not necessarily guarantee that labour and environmentalists will perceive the connection between the two forms of exploitation nor will they necessarily perceive one another as potential allies. In short. the response which labour unions and environmental organizations will have to the dual exploitation of land and labour is highly unpredictable. As will be detailed below, there are many barriers to a labour- environmentalist alliance, e.g.+social class, cultural barriers, and institutional barriers. Despite these barriers, it wi Il be argued that a labour-environmentalist alliance remains a viable possibility. Both Greenpeace and the PPWC have evolved to address the multitude of social problems which have been exacerbated by tirnber capitalists in the past several decades. In the early 1970s, Greenpeace was a fledgling, Vancouver-based organization primarily concemed with issues related to nuclear energy and weapons. It would not be until two decades later that Greenpeace would have a forestry campaign in B.C. Twenty years ago, the 245 PPWC did not have a Forestry Officer or an Environmental Officer. The national officer who dealt with environmental issues was known as a "Pollution Offker." However, both millworkers and environmentalists were concemed about the environmental impacts of the numerous chemicals released into the air and water during the process of manufacturing paper products. According to Stan Shewaga, the first official contact between Greenpeace and the PPWC happened over twenty years ago: The first time that 1 was aware about our involvement with Greenpeace.. . . Greenpeace came down ro Harmac one tirne. they climbed one of those biy emissions stacks we have and put up an environmental slogan, that would have been in the early '70s some time. So. we were the ones. Karl [Karl Hahn, who was the PPWC's pollution officer at the time] had gotten a hold of Greenpeace actually over al1 the emissions that were going into the atmosphere (Stan Shewaga, author interview, December 1 3, 1996). In the late 1980s, Greenpeace was ninniny a toxins campaign in B.C. that fociised on dioxins and other toxic effluents that are discharyed into rivers and oceans by pulpmills. Although both groups had similar policies. i.e. eliminating the discharge of dioxins and other harmful substances into the environment, there is no record of the hvo oganizations making any joint policy statements or engaging in any other public actions during this time. In the early 1990s, Greenpeace began a Canadian forestry campaign whose primary focus has remained on British Columbia. One of the issues that this campaign addresses is the export of semi-processed wood products. This was an issue that the PPWC had been addressing since the early 1970s. The Greenpeace campaign also called for an increase in value added manufacturing, an issue that was later addressed in the PPWC's oficial policy statements and in its officia1 forestry policy published in 1993, Jobs TrJ Poliu. The PPWC publication also advocated the wider use of partial cutting techniques, a 246 position also taken by Greenpeace. in short by the early 1990s there was a high degree of overlap in the official positions taken by these two organizations. This resulted in empirical data published by the PPWC being quoted in Greenpeace press releases and Greenpeace personnel like Karen Mahon being quoted in PPWC publications. Mahon was also asked to speak to a convention of the environmental officers from al1 of the PPWC locals. Mahon recounted that she assumed that the union representatives would be adamantly opposed to reducing the consumption of paper products. "Well. 1 underestimated them totally. 1 asked them for thrir feedback and ihev said. "Absolutely. decrease paper consumption. I thouyht. "These guys are an extremely principled bunch" (Mahon, author intewiew, December 3. 1996). On July 5, 1994 Greenpeace stretched a banner readiny "LOG EXPORTS = JOB EXPORTS" over a freighter leaving B.C. with raw logs. The Greenpeace press release stated. "Greenpeace Canada supports the efforts of unions such as the Pulp, Paper, and Woodworkers Association of Canada to end raw log exports..." (Greenpeace Press Releases, July 5, 1994). In March 1995, Greenpeace, PPWC members, the Forest Action Network, and the Friends of Clayquot Sound gathered at a port in Vancouver to protest the export of cants (squared logs). Cants are often exported instead of raw loys in order to meet provincial regulations which place restrictions on the export of raw logs. Al1 four groups advocated value added production as a means for increasing forest sector employment. Two Greenpeace Zodiacs blocked the bow of the ship which was loaded with cants and headed for 247 Japan. ' One protestor cliained himseif to the s hi p's bowline. The Greenpeace press release quoted Stan Shewaga, who at the time was the PPWC President as saying, "lt's outrayeous that workers in BC are being laid off while unprocessed wood is shipped out of this country. We don't have to choose between jobs and trees: if our industry were managed properly, we' d have plenty of both" (Greenpeace Press Releases March 2 1. 1995). Shewag recounted that the short notice and the location of the protest made it difficult to get a large number of PPWC members to the location on time. "It was hard to set bodies in Vancouver because the bulk of our people work outside of Vancouver. We did put out a joint statement and there was a demonstration with our banners involved as well" (Stan Shewaga. author interview. Decernber 13. 1996). Although the demonstration was mentioned in the major newspapers. journalists failed to mention that the protestors included both environrnentalists and woodworkers. In August 1995, a shipment of raw logs scheduled to leave Vancouver created another opportunity for joint actions. "We were gettiny tipped off by longshoremen. Which happens every once in a while. We get a cal1 from a longshoreman who tells us what's going on down in the harbour ...Aended up being a little impromptu because the ship was there" (Karen Mahon, author interview, Decernber 3, 1996). Greenpeace contacted the PPWC and quoted Garry Worth, who became the union's president after Shewapa's retirement. Greenpeace's press release quoted Worth as saying, "The companies didn't even let B.C. l One PPWC respondent stated that cants are often referred to as "Jap squares." In her research, Marchak found that North American raw log and lumber exports also hmtimber dependent communities in Iapan which are unable to compete with the quality of North American timber. See, -the Gk(1995). workers take the bark off these logs. We need to take less wood and do more with it in order to keep jobs and trees in B.C." (Greenpeace Press Releases. August 23, 1995). The Vancouver S& forestry reporter. Gordon Hamilton ran a story on the demonstration but failed to quote Worth or mention the dual labour-environmentalist opposition to log expons. Hamilton did cite data from the Council of Forest Industries (COFI) indicating that the volume of log exports had decreased during the past several years (The Vancouver Sun August 24, 1995, p. D 1). Thus, even on the rare occasions when woodworkers and environmentalists have cooperated with one another. the popular press fails to bring information to the public's attention which might lead them to question the woodworker vs. environrnentalist dichotomy. According io Tzeporah Berman, by the early 1990s. it became evident that there was a hiyh degree of overlap between the positions taken by the PPWC and Greenpeace and personal contacts between individuals involved in both organizations helped make the joint policy statements and demonstrations possible: We started to notice that their analysis of the issue was ver-close and alrnost identical to ours. 1 believe that there were some people who knew each other between the two orpanizations through progressive poiitics, left wing politics, through union activism or through NDP political work. 1 remember when we first broached the topiç of working with the PPWC there were people who said, "Oh, 1 know that person" or "You should talk to this person", that certainly helps .... What we did in the forestry campaign is cal1 them up. 1 believe at the time we were talking to Fred Henton. 1 met with Stan and Fred riyht before the '95 blockade. And we just basically told them what we would be saying, why we wanted to do these protests .... to raise the issue of exporting rninimally processed products. And they agreed that they thought it was a good idea..We did the action. I'm not sure what their policy is on civil disobedience. We took the Zodiacs in and chained ourselves to logs. There were people who came to the docks in support and they helped us draft Our materials and thinp like that. And, Ibelieve that Stan made some comments to the press (Tzeporah Berman, author interview, March 20, 1997). Interviewer: "Why did you contact the PPWC? How did you see that to Greenpeace's advantage?" Berman. I think that the indiistry spends a lot of time trying to create a division between environmentalists and workers. That it's clearly to their advantage to do that. 1 think that it is clear through their creation of the Share groups and the BC Forest Alliance that what they are doing is trying to get workers to fight the battle against environmental restrictions. So. by trying to build an alliance with the PPWC or other unions, 1 think that we are more threatening to them. Our analysis is that the companies are not looking out for the interests of the workers. But. they'rr actually duping them into thinking that they are In the name of increased efficiency they are cutting their jobs. So, at the time, and 1 still think it is, a natural alliance. If we can gel past al1 of the blackmail rhetoric of the industry and forge alliances with the unions. who actually depend on the forest resources, then we're half way there (Tzeporah Berman. author interview. March 20, 1997). The leadership of the PPWC also saw their interests overlappiny with Greenpeace to a certain degree. However, the PPWC has a broader social agenda than Greenpeace. Furthemore, unlike Greenpeace, the PPWC is willing to become involved in "political issues" related to the distribution of wealth and power. According to Stan Shewaga: It's to Our advantage to work with al1 kinds of groups, not just Greenpeace. The wider scope of suppon and involvement you get, the easier it is to get your message across. As far as social movements are concerned, the trade union movement should involve itself with other yroups (Stan Shewaga, author interview, December 13, 1996). Unpredictable Consequenees OC Dual Exploitation While it is evident that the accelerated rate at which timber capitalists exploited forests and forest sector workers during the 1980s and 1990s helped to foster cooperation between some segments of the labour rnovement and the environmental rnovement, the consequences of capital's dual exploitation of land and labour are unpredictable. A perceived threat to job security can lead labour activists to focus solely on capital's exploitation of labour. A perceived threat to a rare eco-system like old growth forests can lead environmental activists to focus solely on capital's destruction of first nature. Despite the NDP refonns like the Forest Practices Code and the designation of protected areas. old growth forest eco-systems continued to rapidly disappear. In regard to the NDP's reforms. Michael M'Gonigle observed: On the ground. the impacts of the chanye are limited. To stan. it rnust be appreciated that protecting 12 percent of the land base doesn't actually create anything new on the ground; we aren't actually creatins wilderness. It exists there already and in yreairr quantity than 12 percent of the land base. This number is just a fence- a minimum area- where the industrial machine is supposed to stop. Everyday. the amount of natural habitat continues to shrink at a dramatic rate, and there is, in any event. no cenainty at al1 that the 12 percent ultimately "protected" in islands of preservation will actually be able to survive as pristine playpens of biodiversity surrounded by denuded landscapes. And where is this fence to be planted? Oriyinally, that protected 12 percent of the land base was intended to be "representative" of a range of eco-systems. As it has tumed out, valuable old growth stands of forest have been excluded and will be under-represented in the final wilderness mosaic (in the range of 68 percent) with a predominance of wilderness to be set aside in the high elevations of "rock and ice" where the forest indusuy has no interest (M'Goniyle 1997. p. 4 1 ). When one looks at maps which show the amount of the original old growth forests that existed globally and the amount which presently exist. and the amount which are currently protected, the concems of environmental organizations appear to be well founded. The accelerated rate of capital's destruction of old growth forests has produced feelings of desperation arnong some environmentalists. As discussed in chapter six, during the summer of 1997, Greenpeace's forestry campaign in B.C. was primarily focused on preserving some of the last remnants of the temperate rainforests on B.C.'sCoast. Despite MIP (New Democratic Party) reforms like the Jobs and Timber .Accord, industry restmcturing continues to result in job loss among forest sector workers According to Garry Wonh, the concerns of the membenhip had shifted some what by the late 1990s: ....there was agreement with the environmental positions that were being taken by the Wilderness Cornmittee in the mid-eiyhties. rnaybe even Greenpeace, .....Sierra Legal Defence. that kind of thing We saw our vision lining up with the visions of the environrnental goups because the problems of the environmental and forestry issues were corporate control. We saw corporate control as not only a union and a worker issue but in cornmon with the environrnental issues ... Like the Stein Valley. we still are in favour of preserving a specific percrntage of the land base in the province for parks. It was also a reflection of a different style of unionism. The IWA . we were fairly critical of them in the mid-eighties for taking a fairly narrow position. 1 puess when you refer to the IWA in the mid- 1980s. you refer to Jack Munro Well, you can see where he is today, he is chairman of the Forest Alliance. I think the IWA position. not to be critical of them. but 1 think it was a bit too narrow. It was a reflection of the PPWC looking at a broader perspective, just as we were with political issues in the 1960s on international affairs.... .now that we're into the mid- 1990s...... fibre is a little bit more of a precious item these days ... there is a bit more concem about our jobs. our futures as workers, its a reflection of a youngr membership coming into the union too, probably (Garry Wonh, author interview October 30, 19%). By the summer of 1997, the Skeena Cellulose mil1 in Prince Rupert, whose workers are represented by PPWC Local 4, was kept open only after a govemment bailout of the corporation. During the time that Greenpeace was in a pitched battle to prevent Interfor and Western Forest Products from logying "The Great Bear Rainforest", the PPWC and the CEP were engaged in a stniggle to prevent Fletcher-Challenge from eliminating jobs through the introduction of full flexibility management systems. Thus, toward the late 1990s, Greenpeace responded to capital's accelerated exploitation of land and labour by narrowing its focus to more irnmediate concerns like land preservation and the PPWC responded to capital's increased exploitation of labour by narrowing its focus to more immediate concerns like job loss. As will be discussed below, restricting their respective agendas led to a confrontation between these two social movements. The leadership of these two organizations Iiad also changed. In the early 1990s- David Peerla was in charge of Greenpeace's forest campaign. Peerla was perhaps more sensitive to the class aspects of the conflict with tirnber corporations than his successors. This, in turn. led hirn to refrain from engaging in direct confrontations with workers Garry Worth. who succeeded Stan Shewaga as PPWC president. was apparently more willing to accspt arguments that environmental reforms were a potential threat to woodworker's jobs than his predecessor. Thus, a change in leadership in both organizations was also a factor in contributing to the contlict which occurred between Greenpeace and the PPWC in the late 1990s. The Fletcher-Challenge Strike In the spring of 1997, the CEP (Communications Energy and Papenvorkers) and the PPWC began to negotiate a new contract with the New Zealand based multi-national timber corporation, Fletcher-Challenge. The major conflict between the Company and the unions was Fletcher Challenge's desire to implement full-flexibility management systems in its mills and to have the latitude to keep the mil1 operating 365 days per year. Full-fiexibility gives managers greater latitude in assigning tasks to workers regardless of their skills and forma1 training. Although worker safety issues were among the reasons that union members resisted full-flexibility in the mills, fear of job loss was their prirnary concem: lob loss [was the major issue]. Because, Fletcher had clearly tied it into also eliminating Our contracting out language... .Our objection to flexibility was job loss because we could see that they were yoing to bring in non-union contractors and yradually eliminate. by having people do through flexible work practices, each other's jobs ....The mernbenhip would also see it as a bit of a control issue on the workplace...... One of our arguments is safety... . It was an issue. About two nionths into the strike. two supervisors at the Crofton mil1 were killed. They weren't Following safety procedures when they were being fiesible by going inside a tank and thewas 110 axygen inside die tank. So, that certainly didn't help Fletcher. But I don? think it had much of an outcome on the end of the strike ....But the Company got around that by saying, "We'll train you. If you don't feel safe. then you've pot the right under the Workmen's Compensation laws to refuse to do that work, and we'll commit to train people (Garry Worth. author interview. Mav 1 1. 1998). W hile Fletcher-Challenge was seeking to decrease emplovment and wages t hrough full-flexibility and contracting out work to non-union businesses, the PPWC and the CEP were jointly proposin$ reforms that would increase employment. A June 1997 memo noted that historically, unions had fought for reduced work hours. but that the average number of hours worked per week per employee hnd actually increased. especially since the 1980s due to an increase in the ovenime hours workrd per worker. The memo stated: The unions are proposiny a 10% reduction in working time. with no loss in take home pay, and creation of a proportionate number of new, regular jobs. This could be achieved in part through mandatory banking of al1 ovenime, increased vacation time for senior employees and an additional floater for al1 employees. The combined effect of these reductions in working time could create over 1,000 new jobs in the B.C. industry (CEPIPPWC joint memorandum, lune 10, 1997). In July of 1997, Fletcher-Challenge informed the unions that not only would they not consider reducing the work week, they were unwilling to rescind their demands for full- flexibility and 365 day plant operation. On July 14, 1997 the PPWC's Local 1,which represents worken at Fletcher Challenge's Crofton pulpmill, and Communication Energy and Paperworkers (CEP)locals 630, 1092, 1 123, and 1 132 went on strike. The 800 striking 254 workers at PPWC local 2. received $400.00 per week in strike pay froni the union. This was paid for by a $95.00 increase per week in union dues for members who were not on strike. The outcome of this strike would directly affect members in other locals as the union was engaped in "pattern bargaining" which meant that whatever settlernent was reached with Fletcher-Challenge would also apply to other PPWC locals. Individual PPWC locals are autonomous and do have the right to negotiate their own contracts. However. if they seek to negotiate contracts outside of the "pattern" established by the Fletcher-Challenge asreement. then the local strikers would not be eligibie for strikr pay from the PPWC's national office (Garry Worth. author interview. May 1 1. 1998). The strike iasted a total of nine months. which was the longest strike in the industry's history in B.C. In an rttempt to gain public support. Fletcher-Challenge paid for advertisements in newspapers claiming that full-tlexibility in the mills was necessary in order for the corporation to compete on the world market. Having relatively few financial resources did not prevent the PPWC from publicly stating its own position on the strike. PPWC Local 3 established a web site (http://www.seaside.net/ppwc2/views.htm) which featured editorials written by union members and cartoons such as the "Lying King" which showed a lion (Fletcher-Challenge) consuming a tree and defecating a worker while a shareholder pranced about with two fistfuls of cash. The caption read, "The Lying King eats trees and defecates employees." On April 14, 1998, the PPWCKEP reached an agreement with Fletcher Challenge. The unions agreed to full-flexibility in the workplace and 365 days of operation per year. Fletcher Challenge granted a one time $2, 750 bonus per worker, and a two percent raise in the second year of the contract through the sixth year of the six year contract. In regard to the settlement, PPWC President Garry Worth commented: It wasn't the same mode1 of flexibility as Fletcher had wanted at the stan. But it was a lot of tlexibility. .4nd of course, we got improvements for the 365. We got 12 hour floaters for the shift worken. We got double time for working on the Christmas stats We got rid of the pension fund claw back and we actually improved funding for the pension plan ....(Worth, author interview May 1 1, 1 998). Interviewer: Would it be accurate to Say that. due to this settlement. that there is soins to be some job loss, but for the people who remain. it's actually an improvement in that they get a better pension fund and some better benefits'' Wonh: Yes. It's fair to sav that. The other thing we got was improvement in our contracting out language. It used to be language that maintenance workers. we couldn't be laid off if outside contractors was in doing our job. Now the wordiny is that dlrmployees are protected. So. we got some links between work opponunity and flexibility and a cornmitment to a task force on tlexibility. There's quite a few things on the flexibility side of it that we built some fences around and we sot some protection on seniority. So . if there's soing to be job loss. it's going to be by attrition (Garry Wonh. author interview, May 1 1. 1998). Some members of both unions were very displeased with the outcome of the strike Approxirnately 59% of the workers in the three striking mills voted to approve the agreement. After the settlement, PPWC Local 15 in Kimberley forrned a committee to recall Garry Wonh from the presidency. Brian Payne, the Western Regional Vice-President of the CEP,who was also at the negotiatiny table with Fletcher-Challenge, received letten €rom various union executives requesting that he resign from his of'fice (The Geora StrwIune While the PPWC was engaged in a battle with timber capitalists to Save some of the last remnants of working class which still receives relatively decent benefits and a living wage, Greenpeace was engayed in a battle with timber capitalists to Save some of the last remnants of ternperate old growth rainforests. In this particular case, capital's dual exploitation of labour and nature caused the labour movement to limit the scope of its agenda to saving jobs and the environmental movement to lirnit the scope of its agenda to protecting external nature. During the summer of 1997, the PPWC and Greenpeace were not helping one another with their respective battles: moreover. at one point they were in direct opposition to one another. During the time of the IW.4 blockade of Greenpeace (see chapter the), Garry Wonh issued a statement in support of the IWA blockade. Xccording to Worth. It was a bit of a shift in our policy, 1 have to admit. We've supponed Greenpeace historically and other environrnental groups. 1 think Greenpeace was wrong in what they did there. They were blockading loggers frorn going to work because of clearcutting the Great Bear Rainforest on the B.C. Coast. They're also threatening our jobs in the sense that they have this boycott strategy going on in Europe where they're not soiny to buy products manufactured from clearcut old growth forest in British Columbia. And I think the Port Alice pulpmill, which is CEP, is shut down right now as a result of the Greenpeace boycott in Europe (Garry Worth. author interview, May 1 1, 1998). As mentioned in chapter three, by the late 1980s global production capacity of pulp. paper. and newsprint had already surpassed global demand. However, new mills continued to be built based on the assumption that demand would equal or exceed production capacity . For instance, consumption of paper products increased by 25 percent during the early 1980s among several Asian countries (Marchak 1 990. pp. 1 3- 14). The recent economic collapse of the "Asian tiger" economies combined with new cornpetition from the U.S. south and Latin Arnerican countries likely has more to do with the closure of pulp mills than lack of demand for B.C. pulp due to the Greenpeace boycott in Europe. However. if the perception that Greenpeace is causing pulprnill workers to lose jobs is real, then it will be real in its consequences. Despite Worth's public position regarding the IWA's blockade of Greenpeace. there was not a consensus regarding the IWA's actions among the PPWC's national otricers. Sean Reel, the PPWC's National Forestry Officer acknowledged that the union could not support Greenpeace's actions when they prevented loggers from going to work. However, he did not think it was appropriate for Worth to issue a statement of support for the IWA. Everyone knows the hlldown is coming.. . We obviously cannot support Greenpeace in stopping workers from yoing to work. But. we can Say, they 're there to prove a point. To make us aware of something... We could do other actions with Greenpeace. Their [Greenpeace's] strategy and timing was the worst it possibly could be. You've sot al1 three unions in negotiations. You've got the Jobs and Timber Accord cominy out where you've got the sovernrnent calling in its markers from the unions. And sol Greenpeace is out there when everyone is so wrapped up in their own thing. It's like someone just hit you over the head when you're totally concerned with somethiny else and everybody's pissed off with it. ...Tamara Stark started callins me up Thursday about trying to get the boats out and stuff. And, Ilike Tamara, she's a good person ...1 said, Tour best thing here is to put out the olive branch some how and set yourselves out of this situation the best way you can. .. . (Sean Reel, author interview. My9, 1997). Fred Henton, the union's National Environmental Officer, did not comment directly on whether or not protecting the Great Bear Rainforest was a desirable goal, however, he did state that the use of blockades is counter-productive: 1 don't think that they [blockades] serve any useful purpose, because it then becomes a smokescreen for both industry and government. Like I said before. . . . .there are some serious environmental issues, they revolve around forest issues and outside of the forest, like remanufacniring, you name it.. .Byus fightiny amongst ounelves, we let the corporations and the govemment off the hook ...1 think the govemment, and it doesn't matter which govemment it is, they flow with the political wind of the day, or the political will of the day, and if they can score points on that, then that's the route they take (Fred Henton, author interview, July 17, 1997). The Limits of Addressing One Form of Exploitation O'Connor's proposition, "The more capital exploits labour the more it exploits nature, and vice versa", can readily be applied to B.C.'s forest industry. However, it is difficult to predict what effect capital's dual exploitation of labour and nature will have on social rnovernents. In the case of Greenpeace and the PPWC. capital's dual exploitation of labour and nature led both organizations to develop similar forestry policies and resulted in a certain degree of cooperation and communication between labour activists and environmentalists However. as jobs and forests continued to disappear. Greenpeace focused almost exclusively on protecting forest eco-systems whereas the PPWC focused almost entirely on protecting jobs Thus, while it is possible for capital's dual exploitation of labour and nature to induce social activists to address both forms of exploitation. a rapid increase in the rate of either form of exploitation can also result in feelinss of desperation among activists, which in turn may result in activists addressing one form of exploitation whiie iynoring the other. One major factor in detennining joint support among environmentalists and unions on a yiven policy issue appears to be how apparent the connection is between a given policy and the primary goal(s) of the social movement. For instance, woodworken can easily make the connection between exponing raw logs or minimally processed wood products and job loss. Thus, limiting the expon of raw log, chips. cants etc., has been an official policy goal of the PPWC for over two decades. Environmentalists can also easily make the connection between exponing minimally processed wood products and the increased pressure to extract 259 more timber. Thus. this is an issue where there is a consensus between these two groups which in tiirn increases the probability of joint actions. The scope of an organization's social agenda is another factor which affects the probability of cooperation between the labour movement and the environmental movement. Greenpeace has described itself as an apoli tical organization which is strictly concerned with the "environment" Le., external nature. Therefore, unless a direct connection can be made between how addressing capital's exploitation of labour will result in a reduction of capital's exploitation of nature. reducing the former will not becorne a part of its agenda. For instance. an issue like full-flexibility management systems on the surface appears to be strictly a labour issue. Thus. supponing the PPWC on a labour issue was not deemed appropriate. Full-flexibility management systems can be seen as an environmental issue as they decrease employrnent in the forest sector and therefore increase the pressure to extract more timber. However, the corinection between full-tlexibility management systems and increased pressure to extract more timber is not as apparent as the connection between exporting minimally processed wood products and the increased pressure to log more forested land; thus, labour is left alone to fight that particular battle with capital. The PPWC' s agenda includes environmental protection. which enables i t to advocate policies which have no apparent direct connection to labour issues. Worker safety and job creation are among the primary goals of the PPWC; protecting extemal nature is among its secondary goals. By definition, an oqanization's primary goals are given priority over its secondary goals. Typically when an issue appears to be strictly about protecting external nature, environmentalists are left io fight that particular banle on their own. In a case in 260 which a secondary goal, eg,protecting extemal nature, contlicts with a primary goal, e.g., protecting forest sector jobs, then the pal of protecting jobs will often be given priority over the goal of environmental preservation. This in turn can lead to direct confrontations with environmental organizations. However. when primary goals appear to be sornewhat secure. e.g.,job loss does not appear imminent. then secondary goals can rise to the top of the agenda. For instance, in the eariy 1 990s. when employment in pulp mills seemed relatively secure, the PPWC endorsed the creation of parklands. Conversely. in the late 1990s when pulp mills were closing down and tim ber capitalists were demanding concessions from labour. the PPWC publicly criticized Greenpeace's attempts to create protected park lands. It will be agued below the tendency of environmental oqanizations to limit their field of concern and political actions to "environmental issues" and the tendency for the labour movement to limit its field of concern and political actions to "labour issues" undermines the efficacy of both social movements. In reference to James O'Connor's work on the second contradiction of capitalism. John Bellamy Foster has written, "From a movement perspective the implications are clear. Any struggle that anernpts to combat only one of capitalism's "absolute general laws" while perpetuating the other will prove ineffectual. The future of hurnanity and the earth therefore lies with the formation of' a labour-environmentalist alliance capable of confronting both of capitalism's absolute general laws (Fosrer 1992, p. 82). In another article, Foster detailed how environmentalists in the U.S.Pacific Northwest alienated timber workers and limited the efficacy of the environmental movement by addressing capital's exploitation of forests while ignoring capital's exploitation of labour (Foster, 1993). While it is inaccurate to daim that 36 1 Greenpeace has totally ignored capital's exploitation of labour or that the PPWC has totally ignored capital's exploitation of nature; it can be said that the former has placed a much greater emphasis on nature whereas the latter has placed a much greater emphasis on labour. To a cenain degree. the focus of both of these social movernents is rational and understandable. Greenpeace's raison d'etrg is to address capital's exploitation of nature. whereas the PPWC's raison d'etre is addressing capital's exploitation of labour. Greenpeace has focused some public attention on the low rate of value added production in B.C.and the espon of raw logs and minimallv processed wood products. However. its emphasis. especially duriny the past two vears. has bern on wiiderness preservation. Greenpeace's lack of direct communication with forest sector workers combined with the mainstream media's. e.g..conservative media mogul Conrad Black's Ibi; Vancouver SUQ,and The Provincg emphasis on focusing on conflict between forest workers and environmentalists, and its tendency to provide a shallow analysis of forestry issues, e.g., "'jobs vs. the environment" or "loggers vs. environrnentalists". has resulted in a lack of understanding of the organization's goals and policies amons forest sector workers. In response to the question, "What are the goals of organizations like WCWC and Greenpeace?", twelve or 38 percent, of the thicty-two rank and file PPWC members indicated that they were not certain what Greenpeace's goals were regarding B.C.'s forest industry. Five of the respondents, or 16 percent. indicated that Greenpeace's ultimate goal is to stop al/ logging. Twelve, or 38 percent, of the respondents named several of the goals of Greenpeace's forestry campaign and expressed sympathy for these goals. However, some of these respondents indicated that they did not approve of some of Greenpeace's methods such 362 as blockading loggers. One respondent listed several of Greenpeace's goals and stated that he disagreed with these soals. Two of the respondents. or 6 percent. indicated that the primary purpose of Greenpeace was to perpetuate itself and to make money. Thus. a total of 54 percent of the sample either stated that they were not cenain of Greenpeace's goals or that Greenpeace's ultimate goal was to put an end to al1 logging in B.C. This indicates that many Forest sector workers may be unaware of Greenpeace's forest policies. Thus, Greenpeace's focus on wiiderness preservation combined with its lack of communication with worken creates a situation in which their policies are conveved to forest sector workers via the mainstream media or by corporate front groups. like the Forest Alliance. which distributes flyers with tities such as, "The Top Ten Lies Greenpeace IS Telling in Europe."' If Greenpeace is perceived as strictly a "presentationist" organization. then it is more likely to be perceived potential a threat than a possible ally in the worker's struggle against corporate exploitation. This leads to funher confrontations with workers. In turn, this reproduces the "jobs vs. environment" dichotomy Greenpeace's failure to full y confer with the PPWC prior to releasing joint press releases and taking other public positions was also viewed as problematic by both current PPWC President Garry Wonh and recently retired PPWC President Sian Shewaga. Moreover, Greenpeace contacted the PPWC's Forestry Officer on1y @ier the IWA blockade of its ship in 1997. Although it is doubtful that the PPWC would have supponed ' The t'yer was not dated nor was there an author listed. The Forest Alliance's address and phone number were at the bonorn of the flyer: P.O. Box 493 12, 1055 Dunsmuir Street, Vancouver, B.C. V7X lL3, (800) 567-TREE. Greenpeace's summer 1997 blockade of loggers. informing the PPWC of Greenpeace's overall strategy regarding the Great Bear Rainforest and the tactics that they intended to utilize may have promoted more understanding between these two organizations and also may have possibly dissuaded Garry Worth from publiclv supporting the IWA blocknde. Greenpeace's use of blockades. which prevented loggers from workiny . particularl y raised the ire of some of the respondents. The comments provided by the respondent below will be quoted at lengh as they are representative of the ambivalent feelings that manv of the respondents expressrd towards Greenpeace and the tactics it rrnploys. Rrspondent: When the loggers quit cutting. fibre is no longer aveilablr. And we've already seen that fibre is at a premiurn. We're told that likely two to three sawmillr. not sawmills. pulpniills will close due to fibre supply.,. . . . . Interviewer: "What do you think is responsible for the shonage of fibre supply?" Respondent: Well. probably overcutting and no silviculture in the very many years before the middle '80s or even going into the late '80s I'm not. in 1987, I'm not a Greenpeace supporter anymore. but 1 used to be absolutely, because what they did. I don? know if tliey've %onetoo far. it seems they've yone too far now, but what they did in the late '70s early '80s. whenever they were very active, Greenpeace has a lot to do with a whole lot of thing that have chanyed here for the good. okay?. But. 1 think it's maybe fifty years too late. So, that has to do something with the fibre supply ...... 1 would think that overcuttiny is probably the biygest reason there. Interviewer: 1 want to back up a little bit here. What made you decide to withdraw your suppon from Greenpeace? Respondent: Well, when they sot to the point where they were threatening the individual worker, like me. okay, although they never threatened me individually, although they threatened the type of people that I am. and it became a circumstance then if, gee, I'rn biting my nose to spite my face, what do 1 do?.. . . .W hen they were blockading one, they were blockadiny all...... Interviewer: So, you could definitely relate to someone who was just trying to go to work? Respondent: There you go... . . I also found that Greenpeace becarne big business. we used to send money to them, and then we asked for accounting and they wouldn't provide us with accounting anymore. so.. Interviewer- "Yoii mean the local woiild send money to them''" Respondent: Oh yeah. we were Greenpeace charter members. I'm sure we were. And we supponed every campaign they ever did. 1 guess the wolf kill was probablv one, not that I have an issue with it. but some of our members did. and we wanted to know how much money was going to fight the wolf kill. and they wouldn't tell us and thût became a verv contentious thiny on the tloor of our union. and again democracy prevailed and we don't support tliem anymore.I guess I'm still a closet supporter. most of us probablv are. and that's how it goes. ...... thrre was a time when Greenpeace climbed the stack ai Harmac. okay. and that mil1 could have yone down that day. and they were supponed by us. they were there with our blessing. We cheered them down below. cheering them on. Now if they came, I'm sure that there would be guys rallying ûround trying to figure out how to pull them down and throw them in the ocean. 1 know that would be tme as well. So. somethinp dramatic has happened, there has been a yreat shift here for some reason. They've polarized and we've polarized. Maybe Tzeporah Bergman, or whatever her name is, Berman has become the epitome of Greenpeace, and maybe the worker. you know she's a pretty sl ick lady, and the old worker. with the diny coveralls has become the epitome of the worker. They've become high fashion so to speak, they 've become in. And we haven't changed. We are still the worker in the work place. Interviewer: "Would you say that it is still possible for the PPWC to work together with Greenpeace?" Respondent: Oh. I think there are a lot of us who would prefer to work toyether with Greenpeace and the Sierra Defence Leayue and so fonh. 1 know Fred Henton is still doing his very best to mend those bridyes and still participate. And 1 think it is honourable of him, because at the end of the day, we're al1 people, right? And we're the ones who are going to make a difference. The corporations are not. The corporation, I don't think is benevolent. And I don? think it is going to do what it doesn't have to do. If it were, then we'd have two thousand guys working at Hamac instead of six hundred, okay? I'm just picking a number out of a hat here. It would do more for the community. . . . . how can a country continuously ship out its sou1 here? Sell iis sou1 for nothing, it isn't going to work Now, that's where Greenpeace cornes up as well. They're telling the IWA for example. that 'look. what's wrong with you guys?, you iised to have fifty thousand members, now you only have twenty five, or whatever it is. and they're cutting more wood.' What's going on'? It woould be better if they left the trees in the woods. And it's hard to argue about that. So. they are right in a lot of ways. Don't get me wrong. I'm not totally opposed to that, by any stretch of the imagination. 1 just wish that they knew who the enemy really is. The enemy is not necessarily Bob Findlav' either. The enemy is Bay St.. the enemy is the desire to maxirnize the shareholder's equity out there and there's no face on that (author interview). Of al1 the tactics Greenpeace has emploved in its BC forest cainpnign. blockadins loggers undoubtedlv does the most to reinforce the "jobs vs environment" or "loggers vs. environmentalisis" dichotomy in the minds of forest sector workers and the general public. It may be an effective iactic for drawing attention to corporate destruction of old growth forests; however. it is also counter-productive in that it alienates woodworkers and virtually guarantees a direct confrontation with workers who have almost no influence over the policies of timber corporations. This. in turn. places the public's focus and b lame on blue- collar workers and away from corporate managers. Social activists do not harbour any illusions about having the power to physically prevent timber corporations from logginy old yrowth forests. The tactics em ployed by environmental activists are to change corporate practices b y increasing public awareness and concem of a problem. Therefore. there is no reason that these tactics have to be employed Bob Findlay was the CE0 of MacMillan-Bloedel at the time of this intewiew. The timber corporation's current CE0 is Tom Stephens. directly at the site of timber extraction. lncreased public concern can lead to changes in corporate practices either through state intervention or by harming capital's markets via consumer boycotts. There are many alternative ways to accomplish these soals. During the summer of 1997 proiests. Greenpeace did eventually relocate its protest site to the corporate headquarters of Western Forest Products in Vancouver. .As Karen Mahon phrased it. "Our tight is not with the workers and not with the courts, we have moved our fight to the belly of the beast" (Greenpeace Press Releases, May 30, 1997). Having the site of a protest at a corporate headqunners not only avoids a direct confrontation with workers. it makes the protest site more easily accessible to the Inrgrly urban- based media and it places the focus directly on a specific corporation. which in turn may harm the company's markets. As the respondent quoted above suggested, the ultimate responsibility for capital's destruction of forests and forest sector jobs lies not with corporate managers, but with shareholders who want to make the largest profits possible, as fast as possible, regardless of any il1 effects their reckless pursuit of profits may have on labour or nature. Singling out major shareholders for public scrutiny rnay be a potentially effective method of bringing about reforms. This form of social protest would hold individuals accountable who are able to escape criticism by kavins blue-collar workers, and at times corporate managers, to defend corporate practices which are neither economically nor ecologically sustainable. Focusin!: criticism on major shareholders would also undermine the assertion that forest sector workers and rural communities are the primary beneficiaries of the industry's present structure. Although Greenpeace's own intemal labour policies were not mentioned by most of the interviewees. the NGO's resistance to organized labour was a matter that was of particular concern to the PPWC's president, who mentioned Greenpeace's labour policies on both occasions that he was interviewed for this project (October 30, 1996 and May 1 1, 1998). Garry Wonh had not only read the article on Greenpeace's labour policies which appeared in -an Dimension, he is also personally acquainted with Stan Grey, who was one of the principle organizers of Greenpeace's union in Toronto. I've read some articles on Greenpeace and they're not in favour of unions being certitied where they work...l know Stan Grey. Stan tried to organize some workers in the Toronto office. I met Stan Grey years ago through Kathy Wal ker on health and safety issues and 1 was quite impressed with the man. And he goes to Greenpeace and tries to organize some workers into a union and gets fired (Garry Wonh. author interview May 1 1. 1998). .As evidenced by the attitude of the respondents toward lack Munro and the Forest .Miiance. any institution that is perceived as having policies and pals that are contrary to the interests of orsanized labour will not be highly regarded by the bulk of the PPWC's mernbenhip. Of the three woodworker's unions in B.C., the PPWC has the most progressive environmental poiicies and has shown the greatest willingness to work with environmental organizations. However, its recent lack of attention to capital's exploitation of nature and its failure to emphasize the environmental aspects of its labour policies. undermines the union's ability to achieve the goals of its own mission statement: "Working to protect jobs, workers and the environment." As evidenced by Fletcher-Challenge's newspaper advenisements which sought to undermine the positions taken by the PPWC and the CEP,the public's perception of the issues surrounding the strike was highly important to the multi-national. 268 This is likely due to the fact that virnially every mil1 operatin3 within B.C. is dependent upon access to fibre that cornes from publicly owned forests Public ownership of the resource means that the state potentiaily has a high degree of control over both timber extraction and manufacturing. According to M'Gonigle and Parfitt. "Between five and ten years from now 1 57 volume--based forest licenses-95 percent of al1 such agreements-corne up For renewal. the government is under no obligation to renew the licences" (M'Gonigle and Parfint 1994. p. 96). Ergo. the provincial government is under no obligation to renew or make new contracts with businesses which impose full tlexibility management svstems on their employees or refi~seto negotiate a settlement for reduced work hours tvith their emplovees Govemrnent tenure reforms such as the addition of new appurtenance clauses penaining to value added production. reduced work hours, etc.. presupposes a broad consensus among the voting public regardhg the desirability of such reforms. The New Democratic Pany (NDP). which currently holds power in B.C., has traditionaily depended on labour as the base of its support. However. as previousiy mentioned, NDP supponers rank second in concern reparding environmental issues only to the Green Pany. This holds out the possibility of a broad consensus arnong NDP supporters regarding reforms that benefit labour as well as the environment. During the strike with Fletcher-Challenge, neither the Pulp, Paper, and Woodworkers of Canada (PPWC) nor the Communications. Energy, and Papenvorkers (CEP)articulated the environmental aspects of their conflict with the Company. In short, Fletcher-Challenge was attempting to implement changes that would result in the sarne or more raw materials and industrial pollutants being generated with fewer workers. The 269 resulting higher unemployment levels result in more pressure on the state to give capital greater access to nature in order to increase employment and tax revenues. In contrat to the corporate agenda, the unions were attemptins to prevent changes. such as full flexibility management systems. that would lead to job loss and introduce reforms. i.e., a reduced work week, that would lead to job creation without an increase in the exploitation of raw materials or the production of industrial pollutants This. in turn. had the potential to reduce the pressure on the state to gant capital increased access to nature. IF these aspects of the conflict were emphasized. then public support for the stri ke ~wuldli kely have increased. rspecially if environmental orpanizations were publicly supponing the CEP'Sand the PPWC's position. Unfonunatelv. while Greenpeace and otlier environmental groups were focusiny strictly on "environmental issues" the unions were focusing strictly on "labour issues." For reasons detailed above. biockadins loggers or other forest sector workers from soing to work undermines the efficacy of environmental oganizations. As evidenced by Greenpeace's history, there are many alternative methods for effecting social change. If the Greenpeace activists who hung a banner from the Hamac mil1 in the early 1970s. had instead. attempted to prevent workers from entering the plant, it could have easily tumed into a "millworkers vs. environrnentalist" issue instead of a millworker-environmentalist alliance ayainst corporate polluters issue. It is certain that the Company would have preferred the former. The PPWC's statement of support of the [Whblockade was also likely counter- productive. Fint, approximately 70 percent of al1 the timber extracted in B.C. cornes from interior old growth forests, not coastal temperate rainforests, which is the eco-system type in the area known as "The Great Bear Rainforest." This eco-system is extremel y rare global ly (MyGonigle and Pafitt 1994, p. 30). In B.C., a great deal of the original temperate rainforest has already been destroyed (See. Western Canada Wilderness Cornmittee map on next pape). Therefore. loyging some of the world's last remnants of temperate rainforests is not an answer to the high unemployment rates among forest sector workers. The IWA's blockade of Greenpeace and the PPWC's subsequent statement of support, also likely had an adverse effect on the public's support for organized labour. In regard to the IW.A's blockades, one P.P.W.C. rnernber commented: Respondent: "1 don't think that they're [Greenpeace] out there primarily to stop people from making a living. They've recognized who the enemy is. It ain't the working man. It's the business that is going full steam ahead with no thought to the future. It's bloody amazing what the 1W.4 thought that thev were yoing to get away with down there in Vancouver." Interviewer: "The blockade you mean?" Respondent: "Yeah. 1 thought 'What a bunch of poofs' They demonstrated to the rest of the world, who already think we' re a bunch of wood hungry gnats, that yes we' re still Neanderthals. and that we're going to stop these environmentalists from doing the good work against the companies, because the workers cenainly aren't ping to stop working to show the Company. We've got this group that goes out there. They're self-suficient in the sense that they have enough money now they can carry on a banle. And they're willing to take on the Company, while we sit there and cornplain about them and really don' t address the issues (author interview). The above statement was made by a PPWC millworker who is very active in his union. If an individual who is actively involved in the labour movement had this perception of the IWA blockade, it can be assumed that many environmentaliy concerned individuals with no connection to the labour movement had similar, or more negative sentiments. Source: Western Canada Wilderness Cornmittee Barriers to a Labour Environrnentalist Alliance It has been argued that both the labour movement and the environmental movement would benefit from forrning an alliance and by broadening their fields of concern This is not an easy task to accomplish as numerous barriers to a labour-environmentalist alliance evist. The lack of interaction benveen the working-class forest sector employees and middle-class environmentalists constitutes a major barrier to a labour-environmentalist alliance. This lack of interaction results in both social classes having misconceptions regarding one another. In both rural communities and urban areas. social class is the prirnary factor which segregates people in their work environments. their neighbourhoods. and in the forms of recreation t hev engage in. The film maker, writer. and social activist, klichael ~Lloorecontends that the lack of interaction which the left-leaniny middle-class has with the working-class. is a barrier to the advancement of proyressive causes in general. Although Moore's arguments focus on the U.S., they can readily be applied to Canada. Moore contends that the middle-class left has a tendency to address and synipathize with the victims of racial discrimination and oppression or the victims of First World imperialism. However. they appear to be indifferent to the steadily decreasing standard of living amony the workiny classes. Nor do the majority of left-leaning. middle class individuals have any sipni ficant degree of social contact with working class individuals. Moore contends that capital's increased exploitation of the working and middle class. which has occurred throughout North America during the past two decades, has created the basis for broad based social movement. The social isolation of the left-leaning middle class, prevents it from recognizing a potentially strong al1y: 1s it tme what they say about "the left"- that it loves humanity but loathes people'? 1 want to let you in on a little secret I've discovered: "The people" are already way ahead of "the left." After years of being downsized, rightsized, re-engineered and forced to work longer hours for less pay and fewer benefits, they already know from prrsu~irilrxperirru that our economic system is unfair. unjust and undemocratic. They know the evil it does and the havoc it wreaks on our lives. They know that corporate America is the enemy, that the media are tellins them lies and that the Dernocrats and the Republicans are actually the sarne Party. and that neither is worth voting for. Look at any Gallup poll and you'll see that the public is very "left" on al1 the issues- the majority are pro-choice, pro-environment, pro-labour (Moore, 1997. p. 16). As evidenced by data already presented and discussed here, the woodworkers interviewed for this projcct feel that timber corporations are willing to sacrifice worker's phvsical and economic well being to increase profits They do not harbour anv illusions regardin- benevolent corporations which act in the best interest of workers and "manage" public1 y owned resources in an economicall y and ecologically sustainable nianner However, due to the lim ited contact that middle-class environmentalists have with the working-class, most environmentalists probably base their perceptions of woodworkers on the images presented by the media. As aforementioned the media often presents forestry issues as consisting as of contlict a between "loggers and environmentalists." Moreover, in B.C., the mainstream media often ponrays individuals such as Forest Alliance Chairman, Jack Munro or Forest Alliance Director, Patrick Moore as representatives of forest sector workers. This, in tum. likely creates the perception arnong many environmental activists (at least among those who have no significant contact with rank-and-file workers) that the majority of workers have been completely duped into supponing policies which are not in their own interests. To support this position would of course require interviewing a broad cross section 274 of environmental activists, which was not done for this project. There is however, anecdotal evidence to support this argument. 1 asked the executive director of one of B.C.'s leading environmental oganizations why his organization, which publicly supports an increase in value added production and an end to exporting minimally processed wood products, did not issue a statement of suppon for an IWA "wildcat" strike that was being held in a region where the environmental organization was conducting a campaiyn. The strikers were protesting the export of raw logs from the local forest district to a miIl outside of the forest district. The workers were demanding that al1 timber estracted locally be manufactured locally The environmental activist replied that he was hesitant to get involved in disputes between labour and management due to their close ties. He equated a dispute between labour and management to a dispute between a married couple and stated that intefiring in the dispute could cause a backlash by labour against environmental ists. Based on the interview data gathered duriny this project, it appears that the above mentioned environmental activist seriously misjudged the perceptions of rank-and-file workers regarding their relationship to their ernployers. Cultural Barriers? It has been asserted (e.p., Dunk, 1994) that a distinct rural, working-class subculture exists which is hostile to urban based environmental organizations. It will be argued below that a distinct rural culture does noi exist in Canada and that the images which rural woodworkers have of urban environmentalists are primarily based on images constmcted by the urban media and by urban public relations firms which are financed by timber capitalists. In the course of conducting open-ended interviews with both union and non-union loggen 275 and millworkers in northwestern Ontario, Thomas Dunk found that many of the interviewees expressed concerns regarding the environmentai impacts of curreot logging practices and that none of the respondents thought that environmental reforms were responsible for job loss among forest sector workers. However. although the respondents were concerned about the environnient and did not blame environmentalists for job losses, many did not hold erwiro~mmentfist~in high regard. Dunk contends that. "the logic of forest sector workers' understanding of environmentalism is over determined by pre-existing discourses related to class and region which structure their perception and understanding of environrnentalists" (Dunk 1994, p. 18). Like rural forest sector workers in B.C.. rural forest sector workers in nonhwestern Ontario that Dunk studied. live far away from the metropolitan areas where corporate executives. government legislatures. and bureaucrats make decisions which directly affect their livelihoods. Funhermore, these decisions are made by white-collar professionals who have forma1 training and credentials. Dunk assens that environmentalists are associated with middle-class, urban interests. Thus, they are seen as another outside interest group that seeks to impose its will on local workers. "In the dominant discourse, a white collar worker or professional from a large metropolitan centre is usually thought to have more forma1 education. certainly more important knowledge, than the blue-collar workers from the hinterland region" (Dunk 1 994. p. 28). Dunk maintains that rural forest sector workers constnict their own identities throuyh inverting the dominant discourse. This is done by privilqing practical knowledge over theoretical knowledge, blue-collar worker over white-collar worker. and rural, northem resident over urban southen resident. Thus, the identity of rural forest sector worker is 276 constmcted in opposition to a perceived other. This in turn led many of the respondents in Dunk's study to conclude that they had "no use for" environmentalists who were associated with other outside, white-collar, urban interests. Although the resentment toward environmentalists which Dunk observed is likely real enough. it is in part due to the relationship that the working-class has to the means of production, not due to the values of a distinct rural subculture. In B.C.,the core-periphery relationship that the hinterland has to metropolitan areas results in senior level management employees. who reside in Vancouver or in other major metropolitan areas. rxercising a high degree of control over the lives of forest sector workers and timber dependent commun ties (Hutton, 1997; Marchak 1983, p. 305). Therefore. the direct experiences of the rural working class provides tangible evidence to support the opinion held by some rank-and iï le forest sector workers that their economic future is largely determined by urban-based, white collar, professionals. Undoubtedly these feelings of resentment and distrust are sometimes transferred to urban-based, multinational environmental orsanizations. which are dominated by white collar professionals, such as Greenpeace. However, a distmst of large corporations and a resentment toward white-collar workers may also characteristic of urban working-class populations such as the residents of areas like Detroit, Michigan, which have a high degree of unemployment and other social problems due to capital flight and corporate downsiziny (Ross and Trachte. 1985). Residents of these communities may also have a tendency to distrust any institution that resembles a multi-national corporation, particularly a multi- national NGû with a history of intemal labour problems. This perception likely has more to do with actual personal experiences and an individual's relationship to the means of production than with membership in a distinct rural sub-culture. Another distinction that Dunk daims exists between urban and rural cultures is the active engagement with the forest environment: Even the most casual observer of smaller forest dependent communi ties must be stmck with the number of "toys" that are directlv related to the use of the forest environment. A ' typical' yard may contain a pick-up truck, a canoe or boat and motor, a skidoo, and often an all-terrain vehicle. Closer inspection of forest workers' homes will usually reveal snowshoes, traps, rifles, fishing rods and the trophies related to hunting and iïshing such as stuffed fish and rnoose racks on the wall. One must be careful not to faIl into simplistic stereotypes but one must also recognize that these are signs of an active engagement with the Forest. To the horror of animal rights activists and eco-tourists. this interaction with nature is heavily mediated by technology and much of the leisure enjoyment of nature does involve appropriatins it rather violently, thereby reflecting the relationship with nature entailed in logging. Al1 of this is inextricably bound up with local ways of constituting a 'masculine' identity (Dunk 1994. p. 23). To be certain, a hisher proportion of the rural population than the urban population. uses forests as a source of recreation. However, such activities as hunting, tïshing, backpacking, etc., are not activities strict1y ensaged in by rural residents. Moreover, coming from a mral background myself, and having resided in a rural. tirnber-dependent B.C. community for several years, 1 can Say that satellite dishes are more common in rural communities than rifles and snowmobiles and that many rural residents do not interact with the Forest environment in any significant way. Hockey, soccer, curling,, and making use of the local indoor pool are al1 popular local activities. Moreover, the manner in which "masculine" identities are consuucted in rural areas does not significantly differ from the manner in which "masculine" identities are consuucted in urban areas. One important distinction between rural and urban residents in B.C. is that they do not derive al1 of their images of environmentalisrn from the same sources. As discussed in chapter four, mral residents have easier access to material disseminated by anti- environmentalist, corporate front groups, whereas urban residents have easier access to material disserninated by urban based environmental organizations. Dunk contends that the respondents in his study had images of environmentalists and environmentalism which were: . . . .derived primarily from the popular media. The dominant narrative stmcture of the popular media's representation of environniental issues is the jobs- versus environment issue in which middle-class, urban based environmental radicals confront local citizens concerned primarily about employment. Forest sector workers are undoubtedly intluenced by these presentations. Moreover, local pro-development organizations are waging their own ideological battle against restrictions on resource extraction and are working hard to create a hegemonic discourse based on shared values...... For example, according to Judith Skidrnore, past President of the pro-developrnent group Nonhcare ...... (Dunk 1994, p. 29). Nonhcare, the "local" organization Dunk refers began in 1987. right about the same the that U.S. Wise Use oryanizer Ron Arnold gave presentations in the area. Like Share BC. the organization is tinanced by multi-national timber corporations. Representatives from Northcare attended the Wise Use conference in Reno Nevada in 1988, and the rhetoric employed by its representatives is very similar to the rhetoric employed by Share BC representatives (See, Canadian Library of Parliament 1992, p. 9; Deal 1993, p. 72; Rowell 1996, p. 134). As discussed in chapter four, urban based public relations fims like Rozenhart and Robertson, disseminate propaganda in rural areas waming rural residents that urban based, foreiyn funded environmental organizations are a threat to their livelihoods and their rural lifestyles. Thus, it becornes difficult to separate the degree to which rural anti- environmentalist sentiments are generated from within rural communities and how muc h 379 results from urban based influences, such as the mass media and corporate front groups; the latter of which clearly has an interest in capitalking on the well warranted distnist that some rural timber workers have of urban based. white collar professionals. As evidenced by the history of the twentieth century, a well designed propaganda campaign can either engender hatred which did not previously exist. or exacerbate pre-existing hostilities. Although there are sorne minor differences which will be discussed below. the media and popular culture that rural residents are exposed to is essentially the same media and popular culture that urban residents experience. The popular media. Le.. radio. television and newspapers. has become concentrated into the hands of a few corporations. Even many formerly independent l y owned "alternative" newspapers have been acquired by large chains (see. The Natio~June 8. 1998 and June 79. 1998). This results in most of the news being reported b y middle-class journalists who are employed b y urban based corporations. which have no interest in covering topics such as corporate domination of the state or corporate exploitation of forests and forest workers. Thus. the residents of rural B.C. are rxposed to virtually the same news media and popular culture as the residents of B.C.'s lower mainland, which, in turn. is very similar to that of the residents of New York City. If New York City residents have access to news reports on the ecological problems created by logging old growth forests, so do the residents of Mackenzie, B.C.Popular culture is also virtually identical in rural and urban British Columbia. If the Spice Girls are popular in London then, they are also popular in Lillooet, where both Native and non-Native teenagers Wear Nike hats, t-shirts, and sneakers made by Third World children. There is one important distinction between the media available to rural B.C. residents and urban residents of B.C.:most rural communities lack the critical population mass to support a wide variety of media alternatives. For instance, in Lillooet, B.C. the Province. The Vancouver Sun, and the Bri& River Lillooet News are the only newspapers sold. All of these newspapers are owned by the consemative media mogul, Conrad Blnck. Urban residents have a sliyhtly greater variety of media sources available. eg. The Globe and Mail and the Georgia Struboth of these newpapers are slightly more critical of timber corporations than any of Black's newspapers. Moreover. Vancouver has the critical mass to support alternative bookstores. lectures. and the like A distinct sub-culture, with values and norms that significantly differ from the dominant culture, presupposes stable communities in which a culture can evolve over rime. In B.C., most rural. timber dependent communities are not composed of individuals who are descended from several generations of timber workers who lived and died in the same community . Most North American forestry communities were created within the last half century. A few are outgrowths of earlier logjing or agricultural settlcments but many were created as specifically as bedroom communities for large inteyrated sawmill and puipmill operations. Since small woodlots were never established, these towns from their inception depended upon corporate employers. Often such employen have investments elsewhere, and local mills are merely the sources of wood for more advanced manufacniring operations in larger market reyions. In these bedroom towns, niuch that happens is beyond local controi. Fundamental economic decisions about them are generally made in boardrooms far away (Marchak 1995, p. 12). In British Columbia, Marchak has described two sons of timber dependent communities: "instant towns" that were specifically designed to attract a stable workforce to work in mills and in the bush and older communities that had previously relied on 28 1 agriculture, ranching, and logging on a small scale. In the instant towns residents often do not stay long enough to develop significant relationships within the community and there is a low degree of community participation (Marchak, 1983). If one is driving through timber dependent communities in rural B.C.,it is possible find superficial evidence of distinct cultural differences between rural and urban communities. The first thing one sees when they drive into Mackenzie, B.C..a remote, nonhern community, is a massive piece of heavy equipment with a sign claiming that it is "The World's Largest Tree Crusher" (see photo on next page). The tree crusher was used to flatten trees in an aree that was tlooded and made into a lake when a dam was built in the 1960s. This could be taken as evidence of a rural culture which celebrates the conquest of the frontier and human domination of external nature. However, Mackenzie was an "instant town" constructed in the 1970s to attract labour to work in mills and in the bush. The town was designed by a Vancouver based consulting firm and the local town council was originally composed of four, unelected management level employees of BC Forest Products and three government appointees. Marchak's interviews with local timber workers revealed that they had not supponed the darnrning of the Peace River due to the harm to the fish population and the timber that was wasted once the valley was tumed into a lake (Marchak 1983. pp. 306-322).As a result of the dam's construction the local Native population was displaced from its traditional huntiny grounds and placed on a reserve. It can be assumed that the Natives also did not support the project. Given Mackenzie's history, its monuments appear to be more representative of values imposed by outside actors than icons of a distinct rural, working-class subculture which celebrates the conquest of the frontier. As evidenced by the photos on page 283. the rural World's largest tree crusher (above) and r Share B.C. sign (below) in a motel window proclaiming «We Support the Timber Industry." Both photos were taken in Mackenzie, B.C. These images could be used to support the argument that a distinct rural, working-class subculture exists which celebrates the human conquest of nature. Bowever, many of these icons have been imposed on rural logging communities by timber corporations and other external actors. Below are a few of the symbols which some woodworkers have chosen to represent their beliefs and concerns. Although 1 am not making the cldm thrt these symbols represent the beliefs of dlwoodworkers, these images do tend to contrrdict arguments which clnim that rural woodworkers belong to a distinct subculture which is hostile townrd the environmental movement. C(~nfedcrtitjtrnof Ciiniiditin Unions otlicc windciw in Cold Rivcr, B.C. On tlic lcït is ;I Iirinncr relclmiting Eiirtti Postcr tm ;i nrill insidc thc Confcderiithm ol' Ciiniidiiin Unions oîïiçc in ColJ River, B.C. Tlic pctsicr :idvcictitcs pliicing thc Cliryoquut Sound tifflirnitu to Itqging. working class. at least in some cases. has chosen quite different images to represent itself and its political agenda. The older cornmunities described by Marchak. which have historically been more econom ically diverse. are also characterized by a high degree on transience among forest sector workers. When the local branch of a timber corporation hires new workers. the population expands. When the Company downsizes or closes down. the community's population contracts. These communities are usually an ethnic mix of Natives and non- Natives. The Native populations are relatively stable and man' are descendants of the area's original human inhabitants. There is also often a group of long tirne residents who niav have lived in the comrnunity for several generations and who can remember a period of rime before the local econorny was not so heavily dependent upon a single industry. These long terni residents (both Native and Non-native) often form pan of the local opposition which is highly critical of corporate practices and seeks to gain more control of the forest resource: These people, many of them descendants of original settlers, and others, urban migrants who deliberately souyht out compatible physical and social environment away from the neuroses of cities, live in the nonhwest because they love it. Their work, whether in forestry or other employment, is secondary. They will struggle to preserve the beauty of the region. and their assessments of industrial proposals are connected to their primary attachment to the natural environment (Marchak 1983, p. 346). Lillooet has been an established community since the late nineteenth century. Its population, including the surrounding areas. is approximately 5.000. Prior to the 1970s, the econorny was based on ranching, agriculture, and small scale logging and milling. The Fraser River also continues to supply a salmon fishery for the local Native population, which is approximately fony percent of the district's population. As discussed in chapter four, 285 corporate front groups such as Share BC have a relatively strong presence in this community. However, there are also two local environmental groups which address forestry issues. Both of these organizations have worked with urban based environmental organizations such as Western Canada Wilderness Cornmittee and the Sierra Leyal Defence Fund. One of these groups organizes an annual Eanh Day march and community dance. Both of these organizations are active in trying to prevent the logging of the Shulaps-Holbrook range. which is one of the ferv roadless. unlogged valley bottoms left in the forest district. Older. timber-dependent communities are both economically and politically diverse. In short, Dunk's assertion that rural forest sector workers and other residents of rural commun ities. belong to some sort of sub-culture which rejects environmentalism is a gross over- simplification. Like the respondents in Dunk's study, the woodworkers which I interviewed did not blame environmentalists for the decline in forest sector employment. In contrast to Dunk's study, the respondents in this study did not have strictly negative feelings regarding environmentalists. The characteristics of the forest sector workers 1 interviewed were different than the forest sector workers interviewed by Dunk. Dunk's sarnple was composed of both loggers and millworkers, and union and non-union workers. All of the thiny-nvo rank-and-file workers interviewed were union members and m illworkers. Thus, in addition to haviny access to the popular media and corporate propaganda al1 of the respondents also had access to PPWC literature. Moreover. while some of the respondents lived in isolated areas like Mackenzie or Gold River, many of the rcspondents either lived in B.C.3 relatively densely populated lower mainland or in or near cities on Vancouver Island like Nanaimo, or in or near northern cities like Prince George. When asked the question, "When you hear the word, "environmentalist". what words corne to mind?", nineteen of the respondents thirty-two ran k-and-file respondents, or 59 percent. used positive adjectives to describe environmentalists. However. many of these same respondents quaiified their statements by making comments such as Greenpeace had "gone too far" by blockading workers. If Greenpeace hadn' t reared their ugly heads and staned talking about cutblocks and using chlorine and everytiiing else in the pulping industrv. al1 these mills in British Columbia would probably still be usirrg elemental chlorine. But because of people like Greenpeace making the generai public more aware. hopefuliy the median of people have basically forced the government to change the rules and regulations. So, I think they have done sorne good, but 1 think they go too far as well (author interview). Other respondents gave unqualified support to environmentalists. h significant di fference between the respondents in Dun k's stud y and the respondents who panici pated in this study, was that many PPWC members work in environments where exposure to chemicals is an ongoing concern. A rnillworker who was quoted earlier (see chapter seven). who has a disease related to exposure to toxic chemicals in the workplace had this to Say about environmentalists: Well, these are people that are very concerned about air quality (coughs) and water quality. And it's a major thing, because we have to drink the water and breathe the air. For myself, I'm so conscious of the air that I breathe. because 1 have an occupational disease. It is very important the air that you breath. And it's a major thing to live like that. There's an awful lot of thinys, once you end up with asthma. there's a lot of things you can't do. And you don't function like a normal person (author interview). Another respondent, who was very concemed about the ecological health of the forests and exposure to toxic chernicals in the workplace used the foilowing words to describe environmentalists: ' Somebody honest. Sornebody who is not gening paid for their job. They are gettiny paid to control my health and my future for my kids. That's the way I look at it. I've been lied to so much by these companies, eh?, nver the years. And I've beeii active in the union. So, 1 watch and listen to what they Say. And then al1 of the sudden. you're questioning it, some guy will question it. 'Oh no, no. it's not that.' And then, al1 of the sudden, bang! They're doing it... If they keep taking everything, what are my kids or grandchildren soing to have'? (author interview). Many of the respondents referred to Greenpeace when discussing environmentalists and/or the environmental movement. This also occurred in Dunk's study. One of the PPWC respondents stated that he used to send money to Greenpeace but didn't consider their use of blockades to be responsible. so he no longer donated money to that organization. The same respondent stated that he agreed with the policies of the Sierra Club and the David Suzuki Foundat ion. Several of the respondents in Dunk's study indicated that they considered thernselves to be environrnentalists. Three of the respondents in this study described themselves as being environmentalists and stated that they were involved in local environmental issues. Eight of the respondents, or 25 percent of the rank-and-file respondents. used negative adjectives to describe environmentalists such as. "Dummies with yood intentions'' and "Over-educated prima donnas." A common theme among those who used negative adjectives to describe environmentalists, was to describe them as "welfare bums" and/or being the representatives of institutions that were no different from private, for profit corporations. Respondent 1 : My husband says that he figures that Greenpeace gets money from big corporations now, it's no longer a bunch of people trying to improve things, its soal oriented, how corne, the heck, they're on our West coast'?, there are so many environmental problems, what about the rainforests in South America? Why aren't they targting places that really have a problem? ...... Here's an example, we're in Vancouver, down in Gastown they have this environmental store. Interviewer: "Western Canada Wilcferness Cornmittee?" Respondent 1: Yeah. And we're in there and my husband was looking and he says, '1 wonder if these people use toilet paper' and then we're looking around in there ...... then we walked out they said ' Wait a minute! Wait a minute! Oh. we're doing this and we're involved' He says, 'You're probably al1 on welfare! ' , 'Oh no! no! ', Well lie says, 'I cenainly can't take three or four months off in the summer time to 20 sit in a logging road.' You know? Whose payiny these people to go out and keep these loggers out of work?(author interview). Respondent 2: 1 think oriyinally their goals [Greenpeace's] were to ah, enhance the environment. I think now, the leadership of Greenpeace, their goals are to rnhance their position. to perpetuate their jobs. 1 rnean, I heard the other day, 1 rnean 1 read in the paper, this morning, that the CE0 of Greenpeace pulls down $300.000 a year. I don't know if that's proven, but if that's the case, well then. where's your environmental conscience? 1 think the leadership is trying to perpetuate their jobs now at perhaps too big a cost. ..There now a Company. only they're not listed (author interview). Another respondent particularly resented the sabotage of logging equipment, or "monkeywrenching" which is practised by some environmentalists. Respondent: Iust recently, one of the guys went up there to fire up a hoe. They disconnected or screwed back the oil filter and disconnected the alarm system, so the hoe would seize up. Interviewer: "Who did this?" Respondent: Of course everybody is denying it. But, who would do it? And they havebeen spiking trees '....and that can get a faller. You know, it's one thiny to fight out in the open. it's another to pull diny shit. And they've been doiny it. It's probably not al1 of them. You know, Christ they're up there on the line and they're drawing bloody welfare. You know? And some of them are filthy, they stink. they don't even bother washing. But then again, that's not the greater rnajority of them. They draw ail types (author interview). Despite the rnisgivings that some of the respondents had regarding the taciics employed by some of the environmental organizations. Le., blockades, the majority of the respondents felt that it was possible to work with environmental organizations. In response to the question, "1s it possible for labour unions and environmental organizations to tind common goals and work with one another'?". twenty-the of the respondents. or 78 percent. indicated that they thought it was possible for labour unions to work with environmental organizations. Three of the respondents, or 9 percent, stated that either the PPWC's national office or their own local, already did work with environmental orsanizations and that it is a policy which they support. Thus, 87 percent of the rank-and-file workers in this study indicated that working with environmental organizations was both possible and desirable. However, about a third of the respondents who stated that it was possible to work with environmental organizations. qualified their statements by saying things such as: ' None of the mainstream environmental organizations, ie., Greenpeace, WCWC. the Sierra Club, etc., advocate or condone "monkey wrenching." Earth Fint!, under the leadership of Dave Foreman, advocated tree spiking as a means of protecting wildemess areas. In 1987, a California millworker was seriousiy injured when a saw blade hit a spike that was embedded in a fallen tree from a Second Growth forest. The primary suspect in the county sheriff s investigation was a property owner who owned land adjacent to the logging site. This is the only known injury caused by tree spiking in either the US, Canada, or Australia, which are the three main countries in which this activity occun (Foreman 199 1, pp. 149- 154). Under the leadership of the recently deceased Judi Bari, Earth First! renounced tree spiking as a protest tactic due to the potential danger it presented to forest sector worken (Rowell 1996). 1 think any area that encourages renewal of the resource. we can both work on. i mean, we fully support silviculture and studies on how to do it better, to better renew the resource. Those areas. we can detinitely work on, we could probably never work on any areas where a blockade is threatened or people are ping to chain themselves to other equipment. we'd have a hard time working with people who visit the country to set up a blockade (author interview). Other respondents stated that some of the union's membership was an obstacle to working with environmental oganizations: Respondent 1 : I honestly think we cm[ work with environmental organizations]. Better utilization of the product for one thing would cut down on the rate ..A think they would have to. well tïrst off. we still have a group of people within every mil1 that is as redneck as they corne ...They're people who have spent too many years believing everything they saw in the newspapers That really the enemy of the public is what Glen Clark said.' Once you get over that hurdle. get past that generation..... then you have a chance of having cornmon goals (author interview). Respondent 2: I've certainly nin in to a lot of the older employees that, you know have been in the industry for ages ...... and I'm not too sure that, ah, some of thern are that well, worldly 1 guess. You know, 1 often get the impression that some of thern aren't rrally pod at ptting a broader view, son of the overall scheme of things, how things fit in the worid view They, ah, you know. 1 don? know if it's that they're not that well educated or they' re just particularly biased because of the years that they've spent in industry, and it's been good enouyh doing what we've been doiny for this length of time. But 1 think there is probably a bunch in there though that would agree with a lot of the things that environmentalists. Greenpeace and the like, have done. Of course. then it cornes down to if certain things were going to possibly lose jobs. well. who knows? ...... Even thouyh it's an unfortunate thiny in society it seems, people just still tend to look after themselves, and not necessarily think of the consequences of their actions down the road, the grand scheme of things (author interview). Four of the respondents gave an unqualified "no" to the question regarding the As previously mentioned, during the summer of 1997, B.C. Premier Glen Clark referred to Greenpeace activists as "enemies of the province." 29 1 possibility of working with environmental organizations. Some of the reasons given were that, "Greenpeace is too one tracked", and that the ultimate goal of environmental organizations was to stop al1 logging. One of the respondents statrd that the PPWC's national office had worked with environmental organizations like Greeiipeace, and that he thought it was a bad policy and that he could see no circumstances under which his own local would do SO. Based on the above interviews. it appears that most of the workers interviewed for this project were not opposed to working wit h environmental organizations. However. they are highly suspicious of any institution that has a structure and labour policies sirnilar to private sector corporations. Moreover. any orsanization which undermines the ability of workers to organize and engage in collective bargaining and/or engages in direct confrontations with workers is not likely to be highly regarded. Smaller, locally based organizations, e.g, Herb Hammond's Silva Foundation. are likely to have more credibility with class conscious woodworkers than large. multi-national NGOs. Althouph there is not much evidence to suppon the contention that a distinct mral subculture exists which is hostile to the environmental movement, there are some cultural values, i.e., consumerism, which have become a part of al1 Western nations, that potentiallv conflict with some of the industry reforms detailed in chapter five. A transition frorn a capital intensive forest industry to a labour intensive industry will create more forest sector jobs, but it will also require rnany workers to decrease their consumption of material goods. The average annual wage paid to forest sector workers in B.C. is $53.000. The average wage paid to forest sector worken employed by value-added businesses is $35,000 (M'Gonigle and Pdtt 1994, p. 84). As Marchak has observed: These alternative industries are not likely to provide income for workers or profits for cornpanies on a scale approaching lumber and pulp. That is the chief reason that reyions such as British Columbia failed to develop their own furniture industries and did so little research on alternative products from trees. Indonesians and Brazilians have the same mindset: create a mass- production industrv and rnake big bucks in a hurrv. To develop the alternatives, one needs a different mind set: create a small-scale industry and make enough to live on without destroying the environment (Marchak 1995, p. 343). As discussed in chapter four, the dominant ideology in Canada assumes that it is both possible and desirable for each pneration to consume niore material goods than the generation which proceeded it. Ever increasing consumption is the very essence of "progress." This manner of thinking is not unique to Canada, in every Western, capitalist nation, an individual's standard of living, Le.. consumption of material yoods. tends to be equated with their quality of life (Naess, 1989). To restructure the industry in a manner which results in a decreased standard of living for some woodworkers would be considered a regression by those who subscribe to the dominant ideology, even if the transition to a value- added economy does result in more people being employed. Moreover, capitalists constantly reaffirm the pub1 ic's support of consumerism via a barrage of advertising which encourages individuals to consume more and with propaganda which supports the present structure of the forest industry. A transition to a value-added economy presupposes a general consensus in B.C. that the present structure of the industry is neither economically nor ecologically sustainable. At the present time, this consensus does not exist. Institutional Barriers In the case of its Canadian forest carnpaign, Greenpeace has expanded its agenda to address capital's exploitation of workers. However, as an institution. it strives to be an apolitical organization strictly concerned with "environmental" issues. This enabies it to recruit members from that segment of the population which believes in such things as "green capitalism" and "good corporate citizens" and that labour unions are no longer necessary as the Company that would ruthlesslv exploit its employees is a thing of the past. At least this was the perception of at least one of Greenpeace's employees: Interviewer: "As hr as expanding to deal with working class issues, do you think that couid jeopardize memberships'?" Mahon: 1 think that it does actually... . . Being a faller is a fairly high paying job. So. there are a lot of people that say. basically 'What are you doing?' They expect Our job to be purely environmental stuff And people who are anti-big union see it alrnost like big business I've definitely encountered that sentiment. The IWA has made a bad name for itself amon%progressives generallv. Interviewer: "But the IWA is not the only union out there. right?" Mahon: "No. But they take up almost al1 of the social debate" (Mahon. autlior interview, December 3, 1996). An institution such as Greenpeace may also be hesitant to advocate labour refoms such as a reduced work week, as that could result in demands t'or similar reforms within the institution itself. To be fair, Greenpeace is significantly different from a private, for profit. corporation. People work for Fletcher-Challenge primarily to earn a living. Many people see their employment w ith orgmizations like Greenpeace as a means of effecting social change. This, in mm, leads many of its employees to work long hours for relatively small amounts of financial compensation. However, like a private. for profit corporation, within Greenpeace there are vast discrepancies in power and salary which should be addressed. The institutional structure of the PPWC also places limits on the degree to which it can address capital's exploitation of nature. The PPWC is a democratic institution. which means that its leadership cannot afford to iynore the wishes of the majority of its rnembership. Thus, establishing strong alliances with environmental organizations and adopting controversial environmental policies. requires the support of the majority of its rnembership. Creating consensus is not alwavs an easy task: We made it clear that on some issues it was going to be difficult to cooperate because. without a real educational system in place for the members. it's pretty hard to cooperate with Greenpeace when they take a position for instance. of saying "Let's ban ail of Harmac. or bl&B products in Europe." You can imagine the kind of heat you would get. Harmac was an M&B rnill. and Christ. you crazy bastard. what are you trying to do'? But an issue like expon of logs. straight foward. clear. simple thinps that people can understand. These are positions we'vr taken long before Greenpeace made an issue of it. It's a simple one. it's basically the exponing of our jobs. .A cant is not a finished product, it's a raw material. Whether it's to Japan, Southeast Asia. or Europe, it provides work in sawmills in those countries. And it's not only logs, but cants as well (Stan Shewaga, author interview. December 13, 1996). The companies have direct access to workers via the workplace. This provides them with the opportunity to present any action taken against the Company as a direct theat to workers jobs. Boycotts are seldom intended to infl ict harm upon the ernployees of a given corporation or the citizens of a given nation. For instance, the boycott against grapes organized by Caesar Chavez in the U.S. was not intended to put migrant farm workers out of work, it was intended to create working conditions in which farm labourers were not exposed to toxic pesticides. Boycotts against corporations like MacMillan-Bloedel or Interfor are not intended to put loggers and millworkers out of work, they are intended to pressure the companies into implementing more sustainable manufacturing and extraction practices; 295 reforms which are arguably in the long-term best interests of forest sector workers. However, as evidenced by Ainsworth's response to accusations made by the Sierra Leyal Defence Fund regarding violations of the Forest Practices Code, cornpanies can be quite adept at convincing their employees that any criticisrn of corporate practices constitutes a threat to job security. This, in turn. makes it extremely difficult for a union or other institutions to convince the majority of a corporation's employees that certain reforms are in their long- term interest. Thus, there are institutional barriers which place limits on the degree to which labour unions and environmental organizations (at least those which seek to appeal to a broad social base), can address both forrns of capitalist exploitation. Despite the multiple barriers to an alliance it rnust be emphasized that there does not appear to be irreconciiable differences between the labour movement and the environmental movement. Convincinp arguments have been made (e.g., Hammond 1992; Marchak 1995; M'Gonigle and Parfitt, 1994) that there are various reforms which are in the interest of both the labour movement and the environmental movement. Both labour unions, e.g, the PPWC and the CEP and environmental organisations (eg, Greenpeace, WCWC) have endorsed many of these reforms and actively sought to implement them. Land preservation is the issue which most often engenders conflict between these two social movements. No labour union, including the NA,has taken the position that placing a certain amount of the land base off limits CO resource extraction is unacceptable. Neither Greenpeace or any other major environmental organization (e.g., Western Canada Wilderness Cornmittee, Forest Action Network, the Valhalla Society), have advocated the complete cessation of loyging. The main points of contention are how rnuch forested land should the state make available to timber capitalists, which businesses should be granted cutting rights, what methods of tirnber extraction should be utilized, what manufacturing techniques should be employed. where manufacturing should take place, and what products should manufactured. In rnany instances there is already a large degree of overlap between the long range goals of both social movements. Both environmentalists and labour unions have shown a willingness to compromise with capital, there is no reason to assume that they are incapable of compromising with one another with the aim of constructing a mutual plan for restnicturing the forest industry. Which tactics are appropriate to implement reforms is another area where these two groups oAen find themselves in conflict. Tree spiking, the mrthod of protest which woodworkers are most vehemently opposed to, was never condoned by Greenpeace and has even been officially abandoned by Earth First! Ironically, tree spikins was oriyinally a rnethod utilized by loggers to prevent scabs from breaking strikes (Foreman, 199 1 ). Greenpeace appears to be yradually moving its site of protest from the forests to the corporate boardroom where the fate of forests and forest sector workers is decided. An alliance presupposes an agreement regardinp which tactics are appropriate and conferring with al1 parties prior to implementing these tactics. As evidenced by recent history, the environmental movement is willing to abandon tactics which appear to be counter- productive. Dunn~the past decade the environmental movement has been successful only to the extent that it has decreased the rate at which timber capitalists have destroyed forest eco- systems. In recent years the labour movement has been successful only to the extent that it 297 has been able to decrease the rate at which timber capitalists downsize the workforce and reduce wages and benefits. One key factor in the success of capital has been its ability to maintain the dichotomy between labour issues and environmenial issues. For instance. in the public discourse, clearcutting is largely an environmental issue, whereas. full-tlexibility management systems are a labour issue. h labour-environmentalisi alliance would accomplish more than combining the resources of these two social movements, it would be a powerful mol for destroyin~the often false dichotomies of "labour/environmental" issues or "jobsvs environment", which are often utilized by timber capitalists to divide the public. For the most part. tiniber capitalists operating in B.C. must rely on access io public land. Therefore, capital's exploitation of land and labour is already highly politicized. .A political pany may occasionally be able to take actions which alienate supponers of the labour movement or supporters of the environmental movement. However, when an issue is conceived of as both a labour issue and an environmental issue, liberal democratic States risk alienating a very large segment of the public when they favour capital over both land and labour. CBAPTER NINE CONCLUSION O'Connor Reconsidered Due to capital's over-exploitation of land and labour, B.C.'s forest industry will be radically restructured in the coming decades. This prediction can be made with almost absolute confidence as the industry's present structure is not sustainable over the long-term. Predicting what reforms will be enacted or which demands and alliances will be formed by social movements is a more difficult task; as we have seen there are a muItitude of variables which affect how labour unions and environmental groups respond to capitalist exploitation. Certain propositions made by O'Connor regardin3 the relationship between capital 's exploitation of nature and capital's exploitation of labour can be readily applied to B.C.'s forest industry. As is consistent with O'Connor's theory, in the case of B.C., there appears to be a clear relationship between capital's exploitation of forests and forest sector workers. In the bush and in the rnills, replacing living labour with dead labour, combined with more efficient methods of managing living labour, have reduced the time needed for the individual worker to produce the value needed to pay his or her wages. This, in turn. has increased the portion of the work-day which forest sector worken spend generating profits for timber capitalists. Thus, there is increased unemployment among Forest sector worken and more exploitation of the workers who remain employed. In regard to capital's exploitation of nature, timber capitalists have util ized the same technology which increased the exploitation of workers to increase the exploitation of the 299 forests. We conceptualized the exploitation of forests in two ways: First, since almost al1 of the timber extracted in B.C. cornes from old growth forest eco-systems, and the rate of extraction has dramatically increased in the past two decades, tirnber capitalists are destroying first nature, i.e. pristine nature on an unprecedented scale. Secondly, timber capitalists are exploiting the forests at a rate which exceeds the ability of second nature to reproduce itself, i.e., timber capitalists are extracting fibre at a rate which exceeds the ability of the land to regenzrate fibre on a long-term, sustainable basis. The effects of capital's dual exploitation on capitalist accumulation are more difficult to determine. According to O'Connor, the first contradiction of capitalism manifests itself in a lack of effective demand for manutàctured goods due to the over-exploitation of labour, B.C. exports most of its wood products, therefore increased exploitation of domestic labour will not necessarily have an impact on global effective demand. However, Canadian timber corporations are not the only segment of the international capitalist class which has increased the exploitation of labour in recent years. The economic crises in Asia and Latin America, combined with new cornpetitors in Latin America and the southern U.S. States has created a situation in which the global supply of woodproducts currently exceeds the global effective demand. At this juncture, it is difficult to determine if the "Asian flu" is a temporary crisis or if it will tum into a global depression. According to O'Connor the second contradiction of capitalism results from capital's tendency to either destroy its production conditions or to impair their ability to reproduce themselves. In B.C., timber capitalists have already extracted most of the easily accessible, commercially viable timber. This has raised the costs of production and has impaired the 300 ability of corporations operatiny in B.C.to compete in the global market. For at least two decades, the rate of extraction has been above the level which is generally considered sustainable. Thus, it is likely that the worst effects of the second contradiction of capitalism are yet to corne. However, the over-exploitation of B.C.'s resources will likely result in a local crisis for B.C. residents, as opposed to an insurmountable barrier for timber capitalists. It is inevitable that many local mills and independent contractors will go out of business. Some timber corporations will also go out of business or merge with other companies. Other corporations will survive the crises which are created by over-exploiting natural resources by utilizing the same method that timber capitalists have always employed: moving to locations where old growth forests have not yet been exploited or where commercially viable second growth forests already exist or can be rapidly produced. Many timber corporations, e.g.. Fletcher-C hallenge, MacMil lan-B loedel, Ainsworth. and Weyerhauser have cutting rights and/or own land in other provinces or countries. Once BCsforest are no longer profitable to exploit, many timber capitalists will simply obtain fibre from other regions. According to O'Connor, the first and second contradictions of capitalism require the state to intervene in the production process in order to Save capital from destroving itself. In B.C.,there is ample evidence of the state intervening in order to address the multitude of crises created by capital's dual exploitation of forests and forest sector workers. One of the rnost blatant and controversial examples was the pvemment bailout of the Skeena Cellulose in Prince Rupert. Recent programmes implemented by the provincial government, e.g., the lobs and Timber Accord, Forest Renewal B.C., and the Forest Practices Code were designed to address the problems created either by capital's exploitation of forests and/or forest sector 30 1 workers. O'Connor maintains that state intervention in the economy has the effect of making capitalism appear less "natural", which. in turn, increases the possibility of social actors conceiving of alternative ways of structuring productive forces and productive relations. As is consistent with O'Connor's theory, in recent years a multitude of critiques of the structure of the forest industry and the existing arrangements between capital and the state have emerged. These critiques have corne from academics. labour unions, journalists. environmentalists, and First Nations organizations. Although most of these critiques advocate increased public control over the utilization of publicly owned forests, (eg. Burda. Curran, Gale, and M'Gonigle 1997; Hammond. 1992; M'Gonigle and Parfitt, 1994) these proposals are reformist, not radical in the changes they propose. Moreover. there are still some academics, most notablv Clark Binkley (Binkley, 1997). who maintain that free market reforms are the key to an econornically and ecologically sustainable future. While O'Connor's theory is useful for understanding certain aspects of the struggle over the utilization of land and labour. there are many components of this stniyple which the theory fails to address. There are basic values, tg.,consumerism inherent within capitalist culture which create barriers to the creation of a sustainable economy. As O'Connor is largely silent on these issues, other theorists (e.3.. Daly and Hennan 1994; Naess, 1989) were utilized to discuss these components of the struggle for a sustainable economy. The crises engendered by the excesses of timber capitalists have led many people to question the legitimacy of the present structure of the industry. However, O'Connor does not consider the numerous factors which affect how social movements and individuals subjectively interpret the causes and consequences of the numerous social problems engendered by the dual exploitation of labour and nature. Moreover, as we have seen, timber capitalists have not passive1y accepted challenges to the existing social order and have attempted to influence the public discourse regarding the forest industry. The existing arrangements between tim ber capitalists and the provincial government are justified by a dominant ideology which is deeply embedded within the collective psyche of B C. residents. O'Connor does not discuss the underlying assumptions of the dominant ideology Moreover. he appears to underestimate how deeply entrenched these assumptions have become in the minds of the general public. For decades it has been accepted almost without question that the existing forms of productive forces and productive relations are the best way to obtain the maximum social benefits from publicly owned forests. For some. a rapidly disappearing forest resource. government bailouts of fàiling çorporutions, and a steady decline in forest sector employment is not sufficient. at least at this juncture. to lead them to radically question the existing forces and relations of production. Moreover. both the state and capital have actively attempted to quash radical reforms by engaging in public relations campaigns which appeal to the basic assumptions of the dominant ideology. The rhetoric employed by timber capitalists is intended not oniy to reaffirm the dominant ideology. it is also intended to preclude a labour-environmentalist alliance. Both woodworkers and environmentalists subjectively construct their perceptions of the crises engendered by capital's dual exploitation of labour and nature from a variety of sources, including corporate propaganda. Thus. the responses that individuals and institutions have to the capitalist exploitation is hiphly unpredictable. This means that corporate propaganda does not always have its intended effect. It also means that social movements do not always behave in a mannrr which eco-marxists might expect or desire. Among environmental organizations. sorne of them have responded to capital's dual exploitation of labour and nature by focusing strictly on the destruction of forest eco-systems and by utilizing tactics. eg. tree spiking and blockading workers, which tend to alienate them from woodworkers. Other environmental orsanizations have responded to the dual exploitation of labour and nature by addressing both forms of exploitation. e.g., advocating a transition to a value-added economy. blockading the expon of raw log etc. In some instances, a certain degree of consensus regarding which reforms should be implementrd has led environmentalists and workers to cooperate wi th one anot her. Like environmental organisations. labour unions are capable of a multitude of responses to the dual exploitation of labour and nature. The IWA has responded to the decline of forests and forest sector jobs by attempting to offset the effects of capital's increased exploitation of labour by foging an alliance with timber capitalists and aiding them in their attempts to continue exploiting forests at an unsustainable rate. The PPWC has responded to the current economic and ecological crises b y demanding reforms that will alleviate both forms of capitalist exploitation. However, toward the end of the 1990s. the union responded to the loss of forest sector jobs by focusing almost exclusively on labour issues and in one case, siding with the IWA against Greenpeace. Changes in leadership can also have a significant impact on the actions and policies of a social movement even if the core values of the leadership have essentially remained the same. For instance, while in charge of Greenpeace's forest campaign in B.C.. David Peerla sought to avoid direct confrontations with rank-and-file workers as he believed thai is was a 304 false conflict and would distract the public's attention away from the destructive policies of timber capitalists. Those who succeeded Peerla were perhaps less conscious of the class aspects of the conflict with timber corporations and were thus more willing to engage in direct confrontations with rank-and-file workers. In the case of the PPWC,the current president, Garry Worth, appeared to be more willing to accept arguments that the activities of Greenpeace posed a threat to job security among forest sector workers than his predecessor, Stan Shewaga. A change in the PPWC's leadership was likely a major factor in the PPWC's siippon of the IWA's blockade of Greenpeace. Despite the recent clashes between workers and environmentalists. a labour- environmentalist alliance remains a possibilitv O'Connor writes as if social movements almost mechanically respond to the crises engendered by capitalist exploitation. As evidenced by the data gathered from the interviews with rank-and-file woodworkers for this project. it is evident that these workers actively constnict their understandings of the present ecoloyical and economic crises from personal experiences and a wide variety of other sources of information. Directly experiencing the contradictions between corporate rhetoric and practice have led inany of these workers to be highly sceptical of any tnith claims made either directly by timber capitalists or by proxy, eg,via Forest Alliance representatives such as Jack Munro. As capital's dual exploitation of labour and nature has increased, the dominant ideology has become more costly and difficult to reproduce as it no longer resonates with the daily experiences of many individuals. Moreover, fissures in the alliance among timber capitalists, eg, MacMillan-Bloedel's exodus from the Forest Alliance and its recent policy 305 of not clearcutting old growth forests, have likely undermined the effectiveness of corporate propayanda. The present structure of the timber industry relies on the tacit consent of the rnajority of the people who are employed in it, this, in tum, places woodworkers in a key position to effect social change. As stated by the late Judi Bari: . . . . it is only when loggers refuse to cut the ancient trees. that we can ever hope for real and lasting change. This system cannot be stopped by force. It is violent and nithless beyond the capacity of any people's resistance movement. The only way I can ever imagine stopping it is through massive noncooperation (Bari 1997, p. 149). We have seen that rnost of the workers who participated in this project are highly critical of many aspects of the industry. No arnount of money spent on public relations is likely to prevent these workers from conceiving of alternative ways of structuriny the industry; especiall y when their direct experiences indicate that the present system poses a severe threat to worker's health and that both job security and worker autonomy appear to decline with each passing year. While Greenpeace has for the most pan neglected to disseminate information and recruit members fiom the hinterland, other environmental activists (e.g Burda, Curran, Gale, and M'Gonigle 1997; Hammond. 1992) have consciously developed proposals for reforms which speak to the needs of the mral working class and have had some success in gaining support for their ideas in rural communities. Thus. it remains a possibility that a significant number of social actors involved in the two social movements which most often challenge capital's exploitation of forests and forest sector workers, will develop common goals and strategies for effecting social change. Two things are certain: a broad consensus cannot be built around the unsustainable exploitation of nature, nor can a broad consensus be built around a social movement whose sole purpose is to restrict people from engaging in material interchanges with nature. However, there is the potential for a social movement, which addresses both people's immediate concerns of obtaining or retaining jobs which pay a living wage and their long- term desire to live in a healthy, biologically diverse environment, to gain widespread support. Implications of this Study In British Columbia and throughout most of the world eco-systems are being destroyed while global economic inequality is increasinp. We are confronted with ecological and economic crises that are the joint products ofcapitalisrn and Soviet style authoritarian collectivisnis. Both of these systems produced economic and/or political dites who were able to externalize the costs of their lifestyles and aspirations on to external nature and the relatively powerless human masses. Therehre. it is apparent that radical changes in both political structures and econornic structures will be necessary. What political and econornic reforms are necessary is less apparent. As discussed in chapter two. there are fundamental differences among radical green theorists regarding what reforms would lead to a just and ecoloyically sustainable society . However, many of these theorists (Bookchin. 1 993; Daly and Cobb, 1994; O'Connor, 1988) emphasize the importance of widely distributing the control of both political and economic institutions. Whether or not public ownership of the means of production is superior to haviny property widely dispened among many petit capitalists is one of many debates, (e.g. centralized control vs. local control of land and labour), which can be settled over time through the process of trial and error. In the short- tenn, one of the most important objectives is to give the general public control over the economic and political institutions which affect their life chances and to make these institutions flexible enough to experiment with a variety of potential solutions to the present economic and ecological crises. Structural changes are necessary, but not sufficient to make the transition to a just and sustainable economy. There are certain values. Le., consumerism. anthropocentrism. and liberal individualism. which may be criticized on moral grounds. Moreover. it has become clear that these values are a threat to the suwival and well-being of both humans and non- humans. The various crises created by the unsustainable exploitation of land and labour are not unique to B.C..similar problems threaten people and eco-systems throughout the world. Ever increasing levels of consumption are equated with the "good Me" in capitalist societies. Many people. including myselt have maintained that the transition to a sustainable Forest industry in B.C. presupposes a willingness among forest sector workers to decrease their material standards of living. Abandoning consumerism and developing alternative goals is not a necessity only for those unfortunate enough to be employed in sunset industries. As discussed earlier (e.g., Foster, 1994) the rapid increase in the level of production and consumption which occuned in most Western nations during the second half of the twentieth cenniry was only possible due io the unsustainable exploitation of resources. As Arne Naess and others (e.g.,Duming, 1992) have wamed. decreasing the human population and decreasing per capita consumption, especially in the First World, is not a lifestyle choice, it is a necessity. Therefore. conceiving of ways to create a post-consumer society will be one of the major tasks of the twenty-first century. Moreover, it appears that abandoning the dominant anthropocentric world view is more a matter of lony-term survival than of çatering to the idiosyncratic beliefs of a minority of deep ecologists. As mentioned in chapter two, some First Nations cultures had biocentric world views. Religious beliefs often reinforced these world views, but there was also the understanding among some aboriginal cultures. as evidenced by practices such as hunting seasons etc., that humans depend on non-humans for their existence. In the twilight of the twentieth century, arguments for preserving biodiversity have resurfaced, albeit. in slightly ditl'erent forms. Some contemporary scientists have combined utilitarian arguments for biological diversitv with nioral arguments for biological diversitv: When we domesticated animals and plants. only ten thousand to iwelve thousand years ago, human life changed forever. vaulting to another level in the evolution of culture. Ail the domesticated animals and plants that human beings depend on today were once wild. and we continue to need the genetic diversity that exists in wild populations- that diversity is still Me's major defence ayainst changiny conditions. For this reason alone humanity has an absolute need to protect biological diversity: it is a matter of sheer self- interest. ... .Through our evolutionary history, we are related to al1 other beinys present and past- they are our senetic kin. When we see other species as our relatives rather than as resources or commodities, we will treat them with greater care and respect (Suzuki 1997, pp. 130- 13 1 ). Clearly, conceiviny of ways to move beyond our present anthropocentric world view will also be amony the major challenges of the twenty-first cenniry The harmful ef'fects of liberal individualism, i.e., the belief that individuals have no responsibility for the well-being of external nature and their fellow human beings, is another topic which warrants further investigation. Forestry, tlshing, and agriculture, etc. are industries which have the potential to be ecologically sustainable. With potentially sustainable industries, it is often possible to conceive of alternative ways of restmcturing the forces and relations of production in an ecologically and economically sustainable manner In these cases, it may be possible for self-interest alone to be the driving force behind a labour-environmentalist alliance. However, there are many industries, e.g., fossil fuel production, nuclear energy, which pose both immediate and long-term ecological threats in any form. The complete elimination of these industries is likely necessary. Restnicturing the economy in a manner whicli creates jobs that pay a living waye to workers displaced by the elimination of ecologically unsustainable industries is not pan of the agenda of neo-liberal environrnentalists. According to the dominant ideology. no one sliould be guaranteed job security. If an individual finds that the industrv thev have been employed in for decades suddenly ceases to exist. then they have the responsibilitv to "re-invent" themselves and find new employment. II is assumed that the individual simply needs to be astute enough and motivated enough to recognize these perpetually emerging opponunities. Contrary to this rhetoric. the workiny class in North Arnerica has seen iü standard of living decline during the past two decades. Even in the US.. where Americans are allegedly experiencins unprecedented economic prosperity. the number of people who live below the poverty line continues to increase due io the working poor su fferi ny from it~lderernploj~tnerrr. The transition to an economically and ecologically sustainable economy. presupposes a broad coalition of people and social movements which have the combined power to overcome the various economic and political interests which are hostile to change. People who have immediate worries such as beiny evicted from their homes or findiny a means of reliable transportation to their low wage, service sector job, are not likely to be concerned about the long-terni effects of greenhouse pases or dioxins in their water supply. An environmental movement consisting of individuals who feel no social connection to people, 310 other than exchanging goods and services in the market, and which has no use for those whose skills can no lonyer be commodified. is ill equipped to deal with the crises created by dwindling resources, a toxic global environment, and a scarcity of meaningful work. ËNDICES A-F Appendix A Interview Sc hedule Consent Forms Subject Feedback Forms Appendix B Average Stumpage Fees by Forest District Appendix C Cornparison of' Jobs Created Per Cubic kletre in Difierent Regions Appendix D List of Corporate Donors to the Forest Alliance Appendix E List of Corporate Donors to the Soo Coalition Appendix F List of Corporate Donors to the Cariboo Lumber Manufncturer's Association Intet.view Schedule for PPWC Lods Interviewte's background: BUth year, Place, Class origirw, Education, and Regional Origins. Occupational bistory: Standardized Open Ended Qatrtioo Section. Interviewer: "Now I'd like to ask you a few questions regarding your opinions on B.C.'sforest sector." 1) How would you describe the major issues, regarding B.C.'s forests to someone who has never visited the province before? 2) How secure do you feel that your job is? 3) How secure are other forest sector jobs? 4) Will future generations have the same opportunities to be employed in the forest industry? 5) What are some of the major threats to jobs in die forest industry? 6) What do you feel should be done to ensure the secunty of jobs in the forest semr? Health Ismes 7) In the work place, what are some of the greatest threats to your heaith and physical safety? 8) What are the main goais of timber companies? 9) How do these goais dHer from the goals of worken? How are Company goals and the goals of workers the same? 10) Do you feel that the current logging practices are sustainable? ie. Can current logging aiid milling operations continue at their present rate? 1 1) Do current logging practices and rnilling practices present a threat to wildlife? 12) When you hear the word "environmentalist", what words corne to mind? 13) What are the goals of organizations like WCWC and Greenpeace? 14) 1s it possible for labour unions and environmental organizatioas to fmd common goals and work with one anotfier? INFORMATION 15) What is your main source of information regarding forest issues? 16) Have you heard of Share BC. The Forest Alliance. or the Soo Coalition? 17) If so, what son of contact? What kind of organizations are these'? Have you seen their literature? 18) Have you read PPWC publications like Jobs. Trees. and Us? Consent Forrn #2 SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY/ANTHROPOLOGY INFORMED CONSENT BY SUBJECTS TO PARTICCPATE IN A RESEARCH PBOJECT Participation in this research project involves answering interview questions pertaining to the forest industry in British Columbia. Your participation in this project is confidential. Your name and any other information that could identify you will not be published. The chief researcher for this project ih Alexander Simon. PhD candidate Depanment of Sociology/Antliropoloyy Simon Fraser University. Mr Simon can be contacted at (250) 256-0242. Dr. Ellen Gee, Chair of Sociology/.Anthropology Depanment can be contncted at (604)29 1-3 136. Having been asked by Alexander Simon. PhD candidate in the Socioiogy/Anthropology Department at Simon Fraser University to participate in a research project. I have read the procedures speci fied in this document. Iunderstand that 1 may withdraw my participation in this project at any time. 1 also understand that 1 may rqister any cornplaint 1 might have about the ercperiment with the chief researcher named above or with Dr. Ellen Gee, Chair of Sociology/Anthropology. Simon Fraser University. 1 may obtain copies of the results of this snidy, upon its completion. by contacting: Alexander Simon Ihave been informed that the research material will be held confident by the principal investigator. 1 agree to participate in an interview as described in the document referred to above. NAME (please print): Signature: Witness: Address: Phone #: Date: Once signed, B copy of tb çotl~eathm and a subjeçt fdbriçk fonn should br: providd to you. Consent Form #3 SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY/ANTHROPOLOGY JNFOwID ~mSENTBI' SUBJECTS PAKr"rC~M"I' IN A IUSEARCH I!BQJKE Participation in this research project involves answerine interview questions pertaining to the forest industry in British Columbia. The chief researcher for this project is Alexander Simon. PhD candidate Depanment of Sociology/Anthropolopy Simon Fraser University. Mr. Simon can be contacted at (250) 156-0242. Dr. Ellen Gee, Chair of Sociology/Anthropology Department can be contacted at (604) 29 1-3 146. Haviny been asked by Alexander Simon, PhD candidate in the Sociology/Anthropolopy Department at Simon Fraser University to participate in a research project, 1 have read the procedures specified in this document. I understand that I mav withdraw my participation in this project at any time. Ialso understand that 1 may register any cornplaint 1 rnight have about the expertment with the chef researcher named above or with Dr. Ellen Gee, Chair of SociologylAnthropoloyy, Simon Fraser University. 1 may obtain copies of the results of this study, upon its completion, by contacting: Alexander Simon 1 have been informed that the research material will NOT be held confident by the principal investigator in that my actual name will be used in the final document and statements that I have made during the interview process will be attributed to me. 1 have been informed that 1 have the right to edit al1 statements that are to be attributed to me before they are published in the final research document. I agree to participate in an interview as described in the document refened io above. NAME (please print): Address: Signature: Witness: Date: Once signed ii copy of this consent hm and a subjcct feedbrrck form should be provideri to you. FORM #4 SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY SUBJECT FEEDBACK FORM Completion of this forrn is OPTIONAL, and is no? a requirement of participation in the project. However, if you have servecl as a subject in a project and would care ta amment on the procedures invotved, you may romplele the following fom and send it lo the Chair, University Research Ethics Review Cornmitlee. Ali information received will be tieated in a strictly mnfde niial manner. Name of Principal Investigator: ïitle of Project: DepUSchooUFaculty: Did you sign an Infoned Consent Form before pankipating in the projeci? Were there signifiant deviations from Ihe originally stated procedures? I wish to comment on my involvernent in the above projecl which look place: (Date) (Place) (rime) Corn~letionof this section is ontional Your narne: Address: Telephone: (w) (h) This fom should be sent io the Chair, University Ethics Review Cornmittee, do Vice-President, Research, Simon Fraser University, Bumaby, OC, VSA 1S6. Appendir B 317 Average Stumpage Fem in B.C. Forest Districts - 1996 1 - - i 25 $36.27 1 68 1 ~19.17 5S25.68 Pcnticton 130 $46.45 1,206 S29,45 Y Merrirt 105 S42.0 1 1.262 S23.33 L ' Vanderhoof 278 , S50. 16 1,557 1 $30.45 1 Fort St. James 387 $5 1 .36 2.881 1 $25.9 1 L L Mackenzie 25 S3028 2,545 S 19.75 Dawson Cretk 33 O $27.19 1,095 $1 8.12 ' I Fort St, John 221 , $44.5 1 ' 87 1 E 13.82 I Fort Nelson 84 556.16 1,317 S9.27 Source: B.C. Ministay of Foresu Data cornplied by Trevor Joncs Appendix c Cornparison of Jobs Created per Cubic Metre in Differeat Regions Volume Jobs per 1,000 cubic metres Log@ (cema) milling harvesting total Lillooet TSA ('92) 57 1,000 0.45 0.30 0.76 Ainsworth ('92) 334,000 0.49 . - 1 Lytton Lumber ('92) 78,000 0.64 - B ridgeside Higa('92) 1 1,000 6.20 - - , British Columbia ('92) 1 74,000,000 1 0.92 1 0.34 1 1.26 1 Quebec ('93) 34,600,000 1.60 0.30 1.90 Ontario ('93) 25,400,000 2.20 0.20 2.40 + wi: Minisûy of Forcsb, Lilboct Timbtr Sun~lvAm Solid-Economic Anahsis 1995. Price Waterhow, nie Fonst lndurw in British Columbia 1992. B.C. STATS, MinUtry of Finance uid Corponte Relrtionr Canadian Forest Semice, Scltcted FOWQ~~Seltcted Fonshv Statisticr Clnadi 1995. Infornation Rewrt E-X-48 U.S. Fora Service. Production. Pricu. Employmuit and Trade in Nonhwcst Forai Indumies, 1995. Data Compiled by Trevor Jones Appendix D Ainsworth Lumber Co. Ltd. Canfor Corporation Crestbrook Forest Industries Ltd. Dornan Forest Products Ltd. Fletcher Challenge Canada Ltd. lntemational Forest Products Ltd. Lignum Ltd. MacMillan Bloedel Limited Norihwood Pulp and Timber Limited Pope & Talbot Lirnited Riverside Forest Products Ltd. Skeena Cellulose Inc. TimberWest Forest Ltd. Tolko Industries Ltd. Weldwood of Canada Limited West Fraser Timber Co. Ltd. wekrhacuser Canada Ltd. Corporate Donors A.J. Fonyth & Co. Ltd. A.R. Thomson Ltd. Accurate Rubber Products Ltd. Aggressive Transport Ltd. Alexander & Alcxander/Recd Stetihouse Alm-Wood Contrachg Ltd. AMCO Wholesale Analog lnvestrnents Ltd. Anglo-American Cedar Products Ltd. Anthony-Seaman Ltd. Apollo Forest Products Ltd. Arbutus Grovc Nunery Ltd. Arrow Transportation Systcms Inc. Aspen Planen Ltd. Atco Lurnber Ltd. Atlas Copco Cornpresson Canada Austin Powder Ltd. Auto Magic Tire Ltd. B. J. Camey & Company Limited Bancroft Western Sabs Ltd. BanL of Montnal Bank of Nova Scotia Bannerline Enterprises Ltd. Barton insurance Brokers BASF Canada Inc. BC Bearing Engincea Limitcd BC Gas Inc. BC Rail Ltd. BC Wood Specialties Group Bendickson Contracton Ltd. , Berk's Intertruck Ltd. Blaiklock Inc. Borden Packaging & industriai Products Borer Logging Ltd. British Steel Alloys Bryant Electric Ltd. Bulk Systems (A Trimac Company) Bull Houaer & Tupper Bulldog Bag Ltd. BW Creative Wood lndustries . C & C Lath Mill Ltd. C. H. Cates & Sons Ltd. C. H. ~c~eanLogging Ltd. C. R. AI1 Trucks Ltd. Canadian Imperia1 Bank of Commerce Canadian Mountain Holidays Inc. Canadian Overseas Log & Lumber Ltd. Canadian Stevedoring Co. Ltd. CANLOG Canron Inc. Catherwood Towing Ltd. CD Nova Ltd. Celgar Pulp Company Challenger Chainsaw Services Ltd. Channel International Trading Inc. Chips Ahoy Fibre Supply Ltd. Christenson-Bcllows Valvair Ltd. CIPA Lurnber Co. Ltd. City of Kimberley Cloverdalc Paint Inc. Coast Fortst Management Ltd. Coast Pacific Management Inc. Coast Testing Coast Tractor & Equipment Ltd. Cokely Wire Rope Ltd. Commonwealth Conswction Company Compact ïimber Corpoistion CONIFER Conoco Inc. Continental Lime Ltd. Coopen & Lybrand Copcan Contracting Ltd. Cornier Communicators Inc. Corwest Fabrications Coyote Transport Ltd. Cmssman Machinery Co. Ltd. CSMl Div, Hawker Siddelcy Canada Inc. CU&C Hcalth Services Society Curnmins British Columbia Custom Gaskets Ltd. CVC Services CXY Chernicals Canada Limited Partnership Dave Landon Motors Ltd. DCT Chambers Tnicking Ltd. Deloitte & Touche Delta Cedar Products Ltd. Del ta. West Forest Sales Ltd. Denharco Inc. Desticon Transportation Services Inc. Detroit Diesel-Allison BC Ltd District of Tumbler Ridge Dow Chemical Canada Inc. Dupont Canada Inc. E.B. Horsman & Son Ltd. E.P. Davidson Ltd. Econotech Scrviccs Limitcd Ed Do bler Contracring Ltd El Rancho Takt Home Ltd. Elaho Logging Ltd. Empire International Stcvedores Ltd. F&M installations Ltd. Fibreco Export Inc. Finlay Navigation Ltd. Finning Ltd. Fleck Bros. FMC oFCanada Limited Fonnula Pile & Bridge Contractor's Ltd. Fraser River Harbour Commission Fraser Sumy Docks Lid G k J Hauling Ltd. Galloway Lumbcr Cornpaay Ltâ. Gearbulk Shipping Cuiada Ltd. Goepel Shields & Pa~ienInc. Gough Electric Lirnited H. A. Davis Tmsport Ltd. H.A. Simons Ltd. Hampton Power Products 1984 Ltd. Harken Towing Co. Ltd. Hasti Cartage Ltd. Herman Sawmills Ltd. Hitachi Data Systems Hodgson Botting Mechanical Honeywell Limited Hongkong Bank of Canada Hotel, Restaurant & Culinary Employces Br Bartenden Union Local 40 Houlden Logging Ltd. Hub City Paving Ltd. Husby Forcst Products ICL Engineering Ltd. [ECO Industrial Equipment Co. Ltd. IKS Canadian Knifc & Saw Ltd. Independent Diesel Sales Ltd. ~ndustraService Corporation lndustrial Forestry Service Ltd. lndustrial Reproductions Ltd. lnland Forest Construction Group International Chernical Express Inc. International Reload Systems (1 986) Ltd. Interpac Forest Products Ltd. InterWrap Industries Inc. Island lndustrial Chrome Co. 1WA-Canada J. H. HuscroA Ltd. J. W. Bcrry Trucking Ltd. Jim Lind Logging Ltd. Jones Marine Services Ltd. K & D Logging Ltd. Ka1 Tire Kaman lndustrial Technologies Ltd. Ken Evans Ford Mercury Sales Ltd. Keystone Business Foms Keystone Supplies Company KF Evans Ltd. Kildala Road Construction Ltd. KITA Industrial Controls Ltd. Kitclse Contracthg kd Klohn-Crippen Consultants Ltd. Koebcl Forest Products Ltd. KPMG Kvaemer Hymac lnc. Ladnet Downs Lang Michener Lawrence & Shaw Leslie Forest Products Ltd. Lindcn Group of Companies Lomak Transpon Corp. Marsh & Mcknnan Limittd McDemids & Lofiing (1 967) Ltd. McLcllan Contracting Co. Ltd. Medical Services Association Mercury Express Ltd. Michelin North Arnerica (Canada) Inc. Mill & Timber Products Ltd. Millar Western Industries Ltd.v Mitsui Home Canada Inc. Monarch Broadcasting Ltd. Nanairno Harbour Commission Nelsons Laundries Ltd. Nestes Resins Canada Newnes Machine Ltd. Nicholson Manufacturing Ltd. Nicola Stock Breeders' Association NLK Consultants Inc. Norpac Controls Ltd. North AmTnuisporiation Ltd. North Mitchell Lumber Co. North West Loggers Association NWLA Northern Hardwart & Fumitwe Northgate Warehousing & Dist. Ltd. NRJ Bearing Corporation of Canada Limitai Olympic Forest Products Overland Freight Lincs Ltd. Pacific Coast Cedar Product~Ltd. Pacific Northern Gas Ltd* Pacific Nonhem Rail Contractors Corp. Paci fic Rcgeneration Tech Inc. Pacific Rcsource Educetion Society Pacific Towing Services Ltd. PBK Engineering Ltd. Petro-Canada (Gay Loewen) Petro-Canada (John Austerktsy) Pine Crcck Sawmill Plenk's Wood Centrc Ltd. Port Alkmi Harbour Cornmision Porter & McMillan Ltd. Postle-Owen lndustrial Supplies Ltd. Powell River Regional District Price & Markle Equipment Ltd. Pricc Watérhouse Prince George Rcgion Dcv. Corp. Pro Mac Manufacturing Ltd. Probyn Log Ltd. Procter Bros Logging Ltd. Progressive Mill S~ppliesLtd. QM Industries Ltd. R & E Paving (1 975) Ltd. R. H. Bicknell Logging Ltd. R. Wheeler Trucking Rapid-Span Structures Ltd. Raven Forest Products Rayonier Canada Ltd. Rivtow Marine Ltd. Robinson Rentals & Sales Ltd. Roy International Trading Inc. Royal Bank of Canada Russell & DuMoulin Russell & Lilly Ltd. S.A. Mowat Limited S. Madill Ltd. S.V. Equal Acccss to Public Res. Soc. S&R Sawmills Ltd. Salt Spring Planten Ltd. Salton Fabrication Ltd. Sanden & Company Contnicting Ltd. Sandwcll Inc. Seaspan lntemational Ltd. S hue Our Resources Shields Navigation Ltd. Signode Canada Simonds Industries Inc. SmithaCameron Industrial Inc. Soo Coalitjon for Sustainablc Forets Star Shipping (Canada) Ltd. Sterling Pulp Chernicals Stihl Limitcd Stolberg Engineering Ltd. Stoihert Group Inc. Stnictural Board Association Sunshinc Coast Fomt Coalition Swinton & Company Sylva-Fibre Resources Ltd. Systernatic Mill Installations Ltd. T-Mar Industries Ltd. Ta1 kie Tootcr (Canada) Ltd Ted Leroy Trucking Ltd. Terracc Prc-Cut Mill Ltd. Temtech Equipment Ltd. The Coles Group The Gisborne Group The Inland Group The Pas Lumber Company Ltd. nie Truck Loggcrs Association Timberline Forest Inventory Consultants Titan Explosives Ltd. Toronto Dominion Securities Inc. Trans-Paci tic Trading Tyko Timber Ltd. Ulster Transport Inc. u ni vers al Dynamics Ltd. Valmet Paper Machinery Vaion Kone Brunette Ltd. Van Waters & Rogers Lid. I Kop-Coat Inc. Vancouver Hoo Hoo Club No. 48 Wajax Industries Limited West Coast Wircs#Ol 1 #Div. of JWI Ltd. Western Equipment Ltd. Western Stcvcdonng Co. Ltd. Westran Services Lirnited Westwood Electric Ltd. Wtstwood Fibre Ltd. Whitewater Moton Ltd. Wilkinson Steel & Mctals #O1 1 #(A Division of Pnmetalw Inc.) Wirc Rope Industries Ltd. Woodland Lumber Ltd. Wrights Canadian Ropes Ltd. Wynndel Box & Lurnber Co. Lid. Source: Forest Alliance Website: http://~ww.forest.orgl Note: Jack Munro, the Forest Alliance's Chaiman nf\uod a npuest for daailcd i~fomat,ion itgarding the FA'Sannual budget and details tegarding corporate funding. Appendix E Major Contributors to the Sao Coalition Richmond Plywood Canadian Forest Products International Forest Products Terminal Forest Products Gilham Poliny, Ltd. Scott Paper MacMillan Bloedel Pacific Forest Products Squamish Mills Talbot Logging Phil Perkins Logpins LeBlanc Brothers Logging Black Mount Logging C.R.B. Halray Logging Elaho Loggins Valleau Logging Tyko Lumber West Barr Triple C Burrit & Sons Source: Cheryl Bass, Executive Director of the Soo Coalition February, 1996. Note: Ms. Bass did not reply to a written a request for detailed information regardin3 the amount of money contributed by each supporter or other services provided by corporations such as providing writers, editors, and researchers etc. to the Soo Coalition. Appendix F Cariboo Lum ber Manufacturer's Association List of "Member" Companies Ainsworth Lumber Co. Ltd., Bettcher Sawmill Chirnney Creek Lumber Company Ltd., Evergreen Forest Products Hills and Sons Custom Planning Ltd. Jackpine Forest Products Ltd.. Koster's General Contracting Lignum Ltd. Linde Bros. Lurnber Ltd. Lytton Lumber Limited 100 Mile Woodproducts Pal and Son Custom Plannins Limited Quesnel Laminators Ltd., Riverside Forest Products Limited Slocan Group Weldwood of Canada Ltd. West Chilcotin Forest Products Ltd, West Fraser Mills Ltd. Williams Lake Cedar Products Ltd. Source: &l&River-Lillooet News, May 6, 1998, "Focus on Forestry" p. 4 Note: Susan Ronalds, Office Manager of the Cariboo Lurnber Manufacturers' Association refused to divulge information regarding the organization's budget or sources of its funding (Correspondence from Ronalds to author, luly 27, 1998). REFERENCES Ahlander, A. (1994). Enviro~enpl~v:The lewcv of Soviet environmen- .Brookfield. Vermont: E. Elgar. Arnold, R. (1989). Loggerheads over land use. In Aaron Schneider (Ed.). More=& develow:The impact on pe~~leand the environment (pp 13 1 - i 39)Cape Bretton: University of Cape Bretton Press Bari, J. ( 1 994). Timber wars. Monroe, Maine :Cornmon Courage Press. . . . . Bari, 1. ( 1997). Revolutionary ecology. mlismNature Sociu& (2), June 145- 149 Bauman. Z. (1992). Communism: A postmonern In Z. Bauman (Ed.). Intimations of postrnodernity ( pp. 1 56- 1 74). London: Routledge. B.C. Ministry of Forests (1979). The Forest A& 1979. Online at: http://www forgov.bc.ca/ tasb/legsregs/forest/foract/part?.htrn#8 [Accessed 6 November 19991. B.C. Ministry of Forests ( 1997) merTenure Svsteq On line at: http://www.for.gov. bc.ca.~pablpublctnsltimbtenr/tmbur. hm [Accessed 6 Novem ber 1 9991. . . Bennan, D.,& O'Connor, J. (1996). 1W 9. a solar economv . Vermont: Chelsea Green Pub lishing. Binkley, C. (1997). A crossroad in the forest: The path to a sustainable forest sector in BC.BC Snrdies, m, 39-61. Blake, D., Guppy, N., & Urmetzer, P. (1996-97). Being green in BC: Public attitudes towards environmental issues. BC Snidres, 4 1-6 1. Bluestone, B. (1995). The polarization of American society: Victims, suspects, and mysteries to unravel. Twentieth Cenhiry Fund Press: New York On line at: http://epn.orp/tcf [Accessed 1 2 December 19981. Bookchin, M.& Foreman, D. (1991). pefeweeaa: A betwee- 00-d Djive For-. Boston: South End Press. Bookchin, M. ( 1993). What is social ecology? In M. Zimmertnan (Ed.), (pp. 3 54-373). Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall. . . Bottomore, T. ( 1990). The socialist economv: Theorv and oractic~. New York: Guilford Press. Brown, B. (1995). In timber country andurbanPhiladelphia : Temple University Press. Brown, M.& May, J. ( 199 1). The Greenpeace story. New York: Dorling Kinderslev. , . Bruntland, G.H.(1987). Our common future: The world cornmlssion on the environment gnd developrnem England: Oxford University Press. Burda, C..Curran, D..Gale, F and,h.l'Gonigle. bl. ( 1997) Forests in trust: Reforminil British Colubia's forest tenure systeni for ecosvstem and communitv heaih (Report Series R97-3). University of Victoria. B.C.: Eco-Research Chair of Environmental Law and Policy. Faculty of Law and Environmental Studies Programme. . . Canadian Library of Parliament . ( 199 I A) The orivins and obJective of Share wsin . . British Columbia William Sheridan, Research Branch, Political and Social Affairs Division. Iuly 10. 199 1. Ottawa. Ontario: Library of Parliament. . . Canadian Library of Parliament. ( 199 1 B). Share -os in British Columbia. Claude Emery. Political and Social Affairs Division, December 10, 199 1. Ottawa. Ontario. Librarv of Parliament. Cafiadian Library. . of Parliament. (1 993). Car\pdlên resource indwdnon-uovernmen& i orpanizatlons Pierre Marquis, Research Branch. Political and Social Affairs Division, January 5. 1993. Ottawa, Ontario: Library of Parliament. Chomsky, N. ( 1999). profit over pegple: Neoliberaliandobal orda. New York: Seven Stories Press. Communications Energy and Paperworkers of Canada. ( 1997). More jobs. more fun: shorter of wpLk in & Cm. Ottawa, Ontario: Communications, Energy and Paper Workers of Canada. Capitalism Nature Socialism Brief. (199 1). Against. International. .Paper: An environmentalist-labor alliance. WrnNme Soa,2 (3), 10 1- i 03. . . . . Dalla Costa, M. (1996). Capitalism and reproduction. Caoitalism NuSoa -7 (4), 111-121. Daly, H.& Cobb, 1. ( 1994). For the common eood: Redirectin~the econoniv toward communitv the environment. and a sustainable futurg.. Boston, Mass: Beacon Press Books. , . . . Davis, M. ( 1997). The radical politics of shade. w~smNature Soçialismvil (39 3 5-39. . . Deal, C.( 1993). The Green~eacepuide io anti-environmental orgmizations. Berkelev. California: Odonian Press. Dunk, T.( 1994). Talking about trees: Environment and society in forest workers' culture. Canadian Review of Sociolo 33 (l), 14-34. Durning, A. ( 1997). How much is enough?: The consumer societv and the future of the earth. New York: W W. Norton and Company. The Economist. ( 1992). Let them rat pollution. The Economist. 322 (7745) February 8, 66. Evernden. N. ( 1993). The natural alien: Huniankind and the environment (2nd ed). Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Eyerman, R. & Jamison, A. ( 1989). Environmental knowledge as an organizational weapon: The case of Greenpeace. Social Science Informatipn, 2 ( 1 ), 99- 1 19. Feldman, M. (1 995). mes; . for interpreti-alitative' data. Thousand Oaks. California: Sage Publications. Foreman, D.( 199 1 ). wsionsof an eco-warrior. New York: Harmony Books. Forest Alliance (1994). patr-gks Before the buse of Cpmmpns S- ee on Nat-~urces April 13. 1994 Vancouver, B.C.The Forest Alliance Forest Alliance ( 1996). Jobs and the environment. w,2 ( 1), 1-8. Vancouver, B.C. :Forest Alliance. Forsyth, C.& Marckese, T. ( 1993). Folk outlaws: Vocabularies of motives. hte- eview of SoUQLpgy, a(I), 17-31. Foster, J. (1992). The absolute general law of environmental degradation under . . . . capitalism. Caoitalism NmeSo- A (3), 77-82. Foster, J. (1993 A). Let them eat pollution : Capitalisrn and the world environment. omvReview,- Januarv,10-20. Foster, I. ( 1993 B). The limits of environmentalism without class: Lessons from the . . ancient forest strugyle of the Pacific Northwest. (& italism Nature Social lsm, h 11-41. . . Foster, 1. (1994). The vulnerable ~het: A short economic h istorv of the environment. New York: Monthly Review Press. Geddicks, A. (1994). The new resource waq. Montreal : Black Rose Books. Gore, A. ( 1993). Earth in the bsw.New York: Plume Books. Greenpeace. ( 1 995). Greenpeace blockades shipment of raw logs out of B .C: PPWC bncks cal1 for a ban on raw los expons. August 23. [Press Release]. Vancouver. B.C. Greenpeace Greider, W. ( 1997. December 15). Saving the global economv. The Nation, Vol. # 20. pp. 11-16. . . Habermas, J. ( 1975). Levitirnation crisia. Boston: Beacon Press. .. . Hammond, H. ( 19%). Seeiny the forest mon~~betrees: The case for whoiistic torest m. Vancouver, B.C.: Polestar Press Limited. Hammond, H. ( 1993). Clearcutting: Ecological and economic tlaws In B. Devall (Ed.), Clewut: The truv of i-. ( pp. 25-3 1). San Francisco: California. Sierra Club Books/Earth Island Press. Harrington, M. ( 1989). -ast adfw. New York: Arcade Publishiny. Hay, C. (1994). Environmental security and state legitirnacy. In. M.. O'Connor (Ed.). Ecmthe Politics of Ecoloyy (pp.217- 228). New York: The Guilford Press. Hayter, R.& Bames, T. (1997). The restmcturing of British Columbia's coastal forest sector: Flexibility perspectives. BC Sw(1 13), 7-35. Hoberg, G. (1997, Iuly 12) The war of words in the woods. The ouv ver Su pp. A2 1-A22. Holly, M. ( 1994). The persons of nature versus the power pyramid: Locke, land, and . . American Indians. Interdonal Studies in Philos&, XXVI (1 ), 13-3 1. Hornberg, A. ( 1994). Environmentalism. ethnicity and sacred places: Reflections on modernity, discourse and power. wianReview of Socioloyv and 1- 3 1 (3), 245-267. . . Hughes, D. (1997). Rome's decline and fall: Ecological mistakes? Çaoiusm Nature Soçiatism,&(2), 121-125. Hunon, TA.(1997). The Innisian core-periphery revisited: Vancouver's changing Relationships with British Columbia's staple economy. B,C. Studie~, (1 13). 69-100. IWA. (1995) 1W.4 Canada Constitution (Revised October 19951 Vancouver. B.C. IWA. IWA. ( 1997). The forest is the future: IWA Canada foresr policv. Vancouver, B.C.: IWA. . . Jones, T. ( 1983). -, , '):C-d two contlicts in B.C . Vancouver, B.C.: Federation of Mountain Clubs of British Columbia. . . Kimmins, H.(1991). j3alancing act: Environmental issues in toresu. Vancouver, B.C.: University of British Columbia Press. . . . . Kovel, J. ( 1995). Ecological Marxism and dialectic. Çjloitalism Nature Soccalisrq, 6 ((4). 3 1 - 50. . . . * Kovel, 1. ( 1997). Neyating Bookchin. WrnNaue Soc- B -8 ( 1 ), 3-3 5. Latter. C. and luanita, H. (1 989). Sharing with the Share groups. The Ideari%teu.( a Newslett~2 -78 ( 1) pp. 14. Leier, M. (1 990). wethe Fraser river tlows: The iuialworkers of the world in ou.Vancouver, B.C. : New Star Books. . . . * Lembke, J.& Tattarn, W. (1984). One UP~QDin wood: A g~l~ticalhistorv of oodwo-. Maderia Park, B.C. :Harbour Publishing. Litwack, L. (1962). Theovem.New York: Simon and Schuster. Livesey, B. (1994). The green giant in hot water: The politics of Greenpeace. Dima.,28 (4), 7- 12. Luke, T. (1995). The Nature Conservancy or the nature cernetery: Buying and selling "perpetual care" as environmental resistance. Capitalism Nature Socialism., 6 (2). I - 20. Macneil, J.. Winsemius. P.. & Yakushiji. T. ( 199 1 ). Be~ondinterdwendence: The mesiiiny of the world's economy and the ecoloyy. New York: Oxford University Press. Macpherson. C.B. ( 1961).The oolitical theorv of ~ossessiveindividdism. Enyfand: Oxford Un iversiry Press. Mahon. K. ( 1993) Clnvoquot Sound- .A background. October 19.[Press Release]. Vancouver. BC: Greenpeace. Marchak, M. P. ( 198 1 ). Ideological perspectives on Canada: Second Edition. Toronto. Ontario: McGraw-Hill . Ryerson L im ited Marchak. M. P. ( 1983). Green uold: The forest industry in British Columbia. Universitv of British Columbia Press: Vancouver, British Columbia Marchak, M. P. ( 199 1). For whom the tree falls: Restructuring the global forest industrv C m,(90). 3-23. Marchak. M. P. ( 1995). the aobe. Montreal: McGi &Queens University Press. Marchak, M. P. ( 1998). Environment and resource protection: Does NMTA make a . . difference'? monand Environment, 11 (2). 133- 154. . . . . Marchak, M.P., Aycock, S.L.,&Herbert, D.M. ( 1999). Falldown: Forest pQlicv in British Columbia. Vancouver. B.C. : David Suzuki Foundation and Ecotrust Canada. Marx, K.& Engels, F. ( 1846/ 1988). TheGerman New York: International Publishers. Marx, K. ( 1867/1967). Vol. 1. New York :International Publishers. Marx, K. ( I867Il984). ml Mam: S&cted wriw David McLellan (Ed.) Oxford: University of Oxford Press. Marx, K. (187511978). The Marx-Fneelser: SeaitionRobert C. Tucker (Ed.) New York: W.W. Norton & Company. *. * May, E. (1998). uecm: The cwIn Cu'sfora. Toronto. Ontario: Key Porter Books Li m i ted . Merchant, C. ( 1992). ecolQgv: The search for a livable world. London: Routledge. M'Gonigle, M. & Parfin. B. (1994). Forestopia: A practical uide to the new forest cconomv. Madeira Park, B.C. :Harbour Publishing. MIGonigle, M. ( 1997). Reinventhg British Columbia: Towards a new political econorny in the forest. In T.J. Barnes & R. Hayter (Eds.), Trouble in the rainforest : British ., . . Columb ia s forest economv in transitiQn Victoria. B.C. : Western Geogaphical Press. Miliband. R. ( 1969). The -te in caoitalist society New York: Basic Books Inc. Moore. M. ( 1997). 1s the left nuts? (Or is it me?) The Nation, 265 ( 16). 16- 18. Moore, P. ( 1995) Pacific spirit: The forest reborn, West Vancouver. B.C. Terra Bella Publishers. Morgan. H.L. ( 185 1/ 190 1 ). The lewe of the Iroquois. New York: Bun Franklin. Munro, J. ( 1996). Easles project sets conservation standard. The Forest & The Peo*, January 1 ( I ). 1-2. Vancouver, B.C. : The Forest Alliance. Naess, A. (1972). The shallow and the deep. long-range ecology movement: A summary, a,0, 95- 100. Naess, A. ( 1989). ErplpWv. communitv.. England: Cambridge University Press. Naess, A. (1990). Sustainable development and deep ecology. In J.R.Engel & J.G.Engel (Eds.), &CS of environment developm~t(pp.87-96). Tucson. Arizona: University of Arizona Press. Naess, A. (1993). The deep ecology movement: Some philosophical aspects. In M. Zinimennan (Ed.). bviro-ohilosoohv: Fr- to radd (pp. 193-2 12). Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall. . . Naess, A. (1 997). Deep socialism: An interview with Arne Naess. Caoitalism Nu m, ( 1 ),69-85. . . . . NDP (1 992). WhColymbia NDP Co099 .Bumaby, B.C.: New Democratic Party. . . O'Connor. J. (1973). -cal crisis of them.New York: ST. Martin's Press. O'Connor, J. ( 1988). Capitalism, nature, socialism: A theoretical introduction. Qpitalisrn . . re S&sm, 1, 11-38. O'Connor, 1. ( 199 1 A). Con ference mers bv James O'Connor, Santa Cruz, California: Capitalism Nature Socialism/ Center for Political Ecology. . . . . O' Connor, J. ( 199 1 B). Socialist biocentrisrn. Çapitalisrn Nature Socialis~,2 (3). 93 -94. O'Connor, J. ( 199 1 C). Socialisrn and ecology. mitalisrn Nature Socialism, 2 (3 ), 1-13. O'Connor. 1. ( 1993) Red green politics: A political strategy for ecology movements . . WismNature Socialisrn, 2 ( 1 ), 1-7. O'Connor, J. ( 1994) .A red green politics in the United States'?Capitalism Nature m,5 (1). 1-19, . . O'Connor. 1. ( 1996). World economy in the 1990s. Çaoitalism Nature Socialis~, z(l),113-124. Offe, C. ( 1975). The theory of the capitalist state and the problem of policy formation.-. In L. Lindbeg, R. Alford. C.Crouch, & C. Offe (Eds.). Stress andContndiction in . . odern C um:Pub1 ic Policv and the Theory of the Sta(pp 175- 144). Lexington, Massachusetts : Lexington Books, D.C. Heath and Company. Parfia, B. (1 997). Plan to grow pulp trees on farmland draws fire. The Geora Straiu, u(1544), 14-15. . . . . Patton, M. ( 1990). -ve evwona res- metbods: SecdEdw. Newberry Park, California: Sage Publications...... Pepper, D. (1993). Eco-Sociallsm: From dew ecoloyv to social.London: Routledge. Pepper, D. (1996). Modenienvironmenialism. An introductlpn. London: Routledge. . . Philips, K. (1990). The Politics of rich -or: W- the Arneriw electorate in the -. -. New York: Harper Perennial. Press, E. ( 1996, April 8). Union do's: Smart solidarity. The Nati~, ( 14), pp. 29-32. Pulp, Paper,and Woodworkers of Canada. ( 1993). 1QbS. trewgPPWC fo~ -. Vancouver, B.C.:Pulp Paper and Woodworken of Canada. . . Pulp, Paper, and Woodworkers of Canada ( 1994). The PPWC constitution and ooiicv emats: 1994-95. Vancouver, B.C. : Pulp, Paper. and Woodworkers of Canada. Raskin, P. & Bernow, S. (199 1). Ecology and Maixism: Are red and green complementary? . . ethinkiay Manciyn, 1 (4), 87- 103. . . Recio, A. (1992). A tlawed an incomplete model. Çâp oc-, (4), 3 6-37 Reich. K. ( 1998, February 16). Broken faith: Why we need to renew the social compact. .The Nation, pp. 1 1 - 15. Ravioli, C. ( 1993). On the second contradiction of capitalism. -ni Nature Socialism, -4 (3),58-61. Richardson, M.. Sherman. J.,& Gismondi, M. ( 1993). Winninfl back the words: Confrontinc,- envi ronme rital ex oens an environmental ~ublichearing.Toronto. Ontario: Garamond Press. Rifiin, J. ( 1995). The end of work: The dewot ' the dobal labor force an- the port-market era. New York: G.P. Putnam & Sons. Rosewarne, S. ( 1997). Manism. the second contradiction, and socialist ecology m Nature Socialisq, (3,99- 120. Ross, R. & Trachte, K. ( 1985). The crisis of Detroit and the emergence of global capitalism. JntemwJournal of Urban and Rebal Research, 9 (3),186-2 17. Rowell, A. ( 1996). Green buh:Crlobbvenion of the environmentalve~. London, England: Routledge. Ryan, 1. (1997). Over our heb:A look at &bal clima. Seattle, Washington: North West Environmental Watch. Sandlos, J. ( 1998). Savage fields: Ideology and the war on the Nonh Arnerican coyote. . . e So-9 - (3,41-52. Schneider, A. (1989). Qefomon and dev- in Canadatrw. Cape Bretton: University College of Cape Bretton Press. Scott, A. (1990). and the new socid movemeu. London: Routledgr. . . Shiva, V.& Mies, M. (1993). Ecofeminism. Halifax, Nova Scotia: Femwood Publications. Sierra Legal Defence Fund (1 996). British Columbia's clwcut code. On Line ai: http://uww.sierralegal.or~eponsiclearcut.hm [Accessed 3 November 1 9991. Simon, J. (1 990). Population growth is not bad for humanity. National Fou, ( 1 ), 2- 16 Sklar, H. (1998). Crosscurrents: CE0 greed is out of control. Z Mwing, 11 (6). 9 Suzuki. D. (1997). The sacred balance: Rediscoverin~our dace in nature. Vancouver. B C Greystone Books. Sweezy, P. & Magdoff, H. ( 1989). Capitalism and the environment. Monthlv Review., a (2), 1-10. Teeple, G. ( 1995). Globalization and the decline of social reform. Toronto:Garamond Press. Touraine, A. ( 1988). Pefurn of Ur:Social t,be~rvin gostindustria1 SOC'ietv. - Minneapolis. Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press. Tully, I. ( 1980). A discourse on arooenv Cambridge. England: Universitv of Cam bridge Press . Variations on a Wave (1996). Forests Foreve~[Film]. Victoria. B.C.: Produced by Variations on a Wave. Wi llems-Braun, B. ( 1 996-97). Colonial vestiges: Representing Forest landscapes on Canada's West coast. BC Su,(1 12). 5-39. . . . . Zhang, D. ( 1994). Implicwns of tenure for forest land value mentin Rriw Col-. U npublished doctoral dissertation, Faculty of Forestry.University of British Columbia. 1 - Zinn, H. (1 995). -le s of the IJnkd Sw1493.-W. New York: Harper- Perennial.