Living/working under the threat of the CPAWS & Wildlands League for over 20 years now, I can assure you that these people are never satisfied. Their entire operation depends on being able to fleece donors in order to pay for lawyers who could never survive in the real world other than legal aid. Here is an excerpt from a recent letter to the editor in the Ottawa Valley as an example of someone who has dug into their operations. The letter below relates to forestry but it is the same people

".....

Dear Editor,

I’d like to respond to the “letter to the editor” from the executive director of CPAWS Wildlands League (Janet Sumner) printed in the December 16 edition of the Leader.Ms. Sumner claims that the forest industry is blaming anti-rural special interest groups (self-claimed “environmentalists”), for the woes of the industry.

The forest industry has undergone fundamental changes in the products it produces ever since it started.When the industry began in the Valley, only the biggest and best white pine were harvested; now, 200 years later, virtually every species and quality of wood is utilized.The industry has demonstrated, over and over, its ability to adapt to changing markets, while maintaining a healthy, ecologically sound forest.What industry cannot adapt to is the continuing loss of its resource - the forest – by unnecessary withdrawals of a forested, productive land base for reasons not supported by science, and not examined for socio-economic impacts.

CPAWS seems to think there is some magic wand that can be waved to get “people back to work”.CPAWS seems to be full of ideas – what should be done, what direction the industry should go – but their ideas haven’t produced a job yet.The Valley’s forest industry, with the help of our County politicians and our provincial and federal members of parliament, are working with potential investors to actually build a facility that uses new technology and produces non-traditional forest products. One of the stumbling blocks for our possible investors is our ability to provide a guaranteed wood supply.

You cannot operate a resource-based business if the resource is constantly being taken away.You cannot produce a business plan with an uncertain supply of raw material.You cannot project a future for your business when your resources can be removed at the stroke of pen - without science, without consultation, without assessing the socio-economic impact.

The original proposal to reduce timber supplies from Algonquin Park identified “…potential lay-offs and mill shut-downs…”The latest proposal was prefaced with “…grave concerns about the impact the reduction in wood supply will have on local communities…”CPAWS, parroting the Minister of Natural Resources (who is from the Toronto area) that the local industry will be “guaranteed their current wood supply”, is hardly reassuring.

CPAWS claims that the industry has never lost wood because of “protection”.Really?In the past 15 years, the area available for harvest on Crown land in Renfrew County has shrunk by 30% because of withdrawals of productive forest for “protection”.With the implementation of the Endangered Species Act, it is going to shrink a good deal more.All for “protection” that the best science says the forest and animals living in it do not need!

Many Valley residents have wondered why groups like CPAWS hate rural Ontario. Probably, CPAWS doesn’t hate us; one would suspect they have a romantic (though naïve) view of rural Ontario.What groups like CPAWS see when they look at rural Ontario is an opportunity to raise funds.They understand that we are separated by large distances and unconnected electronically, hence unable to mount much of a defence of our lifestyle.They know we don’t amount to a lot of votes.So, they take a picture of a tree stump and tell people in Toronto (and the politicians there) that those nasty old Valley folks are ruining the forest.The urban public, motivated by a genuine desire to protect the environment, and unable or unwilling to research the facts, fall for this charade and they write CPAWS a cheque.

The “environmental” movement is quite large.Five major groups banded together to get the Endangered Species Act passed.There are hundreds more “environmental” fund-raising groups across Canada.There is huge competition for donations, grants and sponsorships among these gangs.The more outrageous their claims, the more attention they get, hence more funding.They do not answer to anyone – least of all the truth.

Anyone interested in genuinely helping the environment owes it to themselves to investigate the groups they support.A good place to start is at Revenue Canada’s website.All registered charities are required to file a report of their finances (a T 3010), including the supposed “environmental protection” groups.The website is www.cra-arc.gc.ca/charities/

There is an old Valley expression – “follow the money”.If you check “Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society” (CPAWS) 2008 return, you will discover that CPAWS had 3 staff making as much as $80,000 per year, and 3 more staff making up to $119,000 per year.Another group that likes to use us to raise money is The Federation of Ontario Naturalists (Ontario Nature).They have 3 in the up to $80,000 category, one in the up to $119,000 category, and one in the “over $119,000” group.Looks like “protecting the environment” pays pretty good.

Oh, the average wage in Renfrew County?In 2005, it was $26,333.

Maybe Ms. Sumner is right.We should diversify, and one of the things we should diversify into is anti-rural fundraising.It pays an awful lot better than logging.

Charities are not supposed to lobby governments.Why, then, are all the self-claimed “environmental protection” charities located in Toronto?Why aren’t they located out in the rural areas?Why isn’t there a “sunshine list” (a listing of all public service employees who make in excess of $100,000 per year) for employees of charities? A “sunshine list” might make your decision of which “environmental protection” group to support a good deal easier!