March 5, 2003

 To: the Editor

 Families working in forestry have been decimated by attacks from activists in recent years. Families working in other  sustainable resource sectors are currently facing relentless attacks by activists. Meanwhile: "The non profit sector is one of the fastest growing sectors in North America right now, and with almost 150,000 registered charities on non profits operating in Canada, it shows no signs of slowing down". [Charity Village.com] WHY? Could it be that activists are supported by charitable tax status? Is this field not only "FUN" but profitable as well?

 There are just so many questions:

            1. Is forestry in B. C really unsustainable?

            2. Is farmed salmon really dangerous?

            3. Is Alar on apples really a health risk?

Or are all of the above well-planned media "CAMPAIGNS"? Are these hot button campaigns designed to cause fear with well meaning but misinformed urban donors? Does this fear stimulate these donors to send the activists their "TAX DEDUCTABLE" donations? Does this evoke a warm fuzzy feeling within the donor who now knows they have 'helped'? It is really easy to donate. Just go to any one of their web sites and see for yourselves.

Remember, this is a fast growing, well funded, lucrative sector. One foundation alone had a net income of $157,637,364.00 in 2001. If activism isn't "FUN" it certainly is profitable.

 Will the attacks on Canadian working families end any time soon? APPARENTLY NOT! Jennifer Lash the lead coordinator for a coalition of west coast activist organizations said, "As organizations on the west coast, we need to remain untied for the long haul – there's always another issue to work on" [Tides Canada web site]

 Maybe the time has come for working families to ask their politicians and Revenue Canada: WHY DO THESE ACTIVISTS ENJOY CHARITABLE STATUS? 

Sincerely;

Calvin Clandening

Re: “Tourism letter by Lynette Kershaw

            Ms. Kershaw must not be aware of the extraordinary success of Marine Link’ Aurora tours. Tourists line up to take a working boat tour up coast. The big draw? It stops at logging camps and fish farms all along the way. I have difficulty with Ms. Kershaw’s position. B.C. has thousands of square miles of coast; salmon growers currently occupy a space smaller that Stanley Park. Should salmon growers be denied this postage stamp on our vast coastline? That’s wat those who seek to marginalize this segment of our coast want.

            Before fish farms arrived in Norway, the same thing happened to their wild salmon as what’s happening here, people killed them for profit and for pleasure. Currently Norway has a booming offshore oil industry, a booming fish farm industry ($3 billion) and a booming tourism industry.

            All of this economic activity creates shorter waits for medical care and smaller class sizes for children. The UN voted Norway a better place to live than Canada. Why doesn’t Canada have a better standard of living? Could tax laws encourage people to make their living by raking in tax-deductible donations? Do the income generating “campaigns” created by these people block economic activities that would improve our standard of living?

            I think I have Ms. Kershaw’s letter figured out now. It’s what activists always resort to when lacking twistable data to support their “campaigns”, fear mongering! Yep, it’s a sure fire way to get the donations flowing.

Calvin Clandening

July 1, 2003

To The Editor,

Unlike Mr. Otto Langer I do not get paid $4,000 / month to write letters to your paper. I do not have the luxury of a four-day workweek and unlike Mr. Langer and his 28 fellow employees with “fun” careers at the Suzuki Foundation, my family does not have the security of a benefits package that includes a retirement plan.

What makes me give up my Canada Day Holiday to respond to Mr. Langer’s letter? Your readers need to know that Mr. Langer and BC’s band of eco-mercenaries are winning their current smear campaign against salmon growers in B and investment dollars are leaving this province.

The result of their victories in human terms? Last year at this time our small supply firm had 22 employees and now has only 6. Of those let go, 3 have children under 2 years of age. They have been forced to return to social assistance and still others have had to return to the E.I. ski team and killing salmon seasonally to make ends meet. And we are but a microcosm of the salmon growing industry as a whole.

This human carnage is directed by a cartel of foreign eco-imperialists who share limos and sip martinis at the same exclusive country clubs as the Governor of Alaska and the salmon processing tycoons that got him elected. The 100’s of millions of financing the eco-mercenary industry in BC come from names like Brainerd, Bullitt, Packard, and Pew to name but a few. If their founders could see the human devastation their current directors are now causing, I think they would roll over in their graves.

Isn’t this an example of philanthropy gone wrong? Isn’t it time for Canadians to tell the eco-imperialists to butt our of our affairs?

Sincerely,