Contrary to Ms. Deuling’s opinion, Friends of The Watersheds are not anti-log- ging and have never stated anything of the kind (North Shore News Jan. 7). We advocate ecologically sustainable and alternative logging methods and hope that the forest industry, our government and its citizens will all strive to. eventually bring a creative long-term vision of logging in our diverse forested ecosystems. However, there is only one consideration for the Greater Vancouver Regional District drinking wetersheds: the protection of water runoff and water supply, not the redefined “protection” through logging which the water district has so cleverly coined. A position of no logging in drinking water- sheds is not a bias, as Ms. Deuling feebly attempts to argue. it is based on comniun sense and research that shows thar the best water supply is produced from undisturbed water- sheds. “The quality and quantity of water within a watershed is largely a function of the intact for- est cover.” (See Ecosystems of B.C., Ministry of Forests.) It should be noted thar Ms. Deuling’s bias comes from her own background as an “edu- cator” with the water district in the Seymour Demonstration Forest education program. The role of the Demonstration Forest is to serve as a public relations machine for corpo- rate forestry, and to “educate” visitors about the continuation of logging in our three water- sheds and other watersheds in B.C. The committee was established in 1985 and was strongly represented by the forest industry to prevent the area below the Seymour Dam from becoming a public park. For 41 years there was no logging in the watersheds. The first Commissioncr of the Greater Vancouver Water District, Dr. E.A. Cleveland enforced a policy of no logging in the watersheds from 1926 to 1952. That policy was adopted by all the GVRD municipalities up until 1967, when our local politicians were. duped by forestry censultants and the B.C. Ministry of Forests to allow for sustained-yield logging. "The current water district says that it employs logging to improve water quality, an untested assumption which “Friends of The Watersheds” challenges. Nowhere in Ms. Deuling’s letter does she even mention concerns about water quality and the integrity of forest hydrology, and nowhere is she concerned about rehabilitating the dam- _age inflicted by the water district’s forestry department to our watersheds over the past 36 years. The idea that foresters can improve upon water quality by logging selected areas of ancient forest is unproven. Can Ms. Dueling provide readers with studies that provide evi- dence that a logged landscape (even selectively logged) improves water quality? a i Gj p://www.nsnews.com or Ms. Dueling propagates the myth that the watersheds’ forests are only “removed” by either fire. disease or wind. She fails to mention the main agent of forest cover renewal is through narural forest suc- cession. . It is true that there are fires in the waterskeds, but the issue has been used as a smoke- screen for logging snags and healthy standing trees found within cutblocks. in the worst recorded year for lightning (1990) there were 130 light- ning strikes recorded in the watersheds, of these strikes only 11 started fires and the total area burned was 3.0 hectares (source: GVRD 1990 Annual Report to Ministry of Forests). During the period 1950 to 1990 a total of 5.6 ha of forest was fost to fires due to light- ning, .6 ha due to campfires and 85.9 due to escape stashburns caused by the GVRD's own we (source GVRP Final Summary Report ; 91). There has been 4,000 hha of forest removed by logging and 300 kilometers removed by roadbuilding. Fires in the watersheds are casily managed by aerial water bombers and crews dropped in from helicopters. Allowing the watersheds’ forests to evolve through narural succession and undisturbed by logging and roadbuilding is the best manage- men? strategy for GVRD officials to take to ensure water quality and quantit.. A B.C. Provincial Court judge ruled in 1994 against logging in Victoria’s watersheds and President Clinton signed a bill in 1996 banning logging and roadbuilding in Portland’s drinking watersheds. These are important precedents and should help guide municipal politicians to make the correct deci- sion to ban logging in the GVRD watersheds. Ross Muirhead Friends of The Watersheds Check papers for new puppy pets Dear Editor: When your heart goes out to that cute lit- tle puppy in the window in a pet store, it is very important that you ask to see the parent dogs and to sce where these adult dogs live. When the store clerk assures you that all the pups are “vet checked” it is again very impor- tant that you are given a card with the person- al hand wrizten signature of the vet. There will be short checks and a few short notes on what the pup has been checked for and the findings. The veterinarians do this every day, if the shop owner can not give you this information in written form to take home with you then do not part with your money. Doris Orr North Vancouver news LOOK FOR US ON 732 IITEGNET trenshaw 6 direct.ca ORAS, Ee Ee MULTIPLE OPPORTUNITIES FUND + . The Globe & Mail (Jan. 16/97) is a small-cap, Canadian stock fund administered and reactively managed by Chan Buckland of ranks Multiple Opportunities Canaccord Capital in Vancouver. The Fund is consistently ranked as one of Canada’s top performers. Fund the top performer in Canada jt lhalineie edeneteey senlenlrenbentent wales ee ae ce a ee ee cae ee ee ee ome an ee . For complete information on the 1 Name over the five year period ended i Multiple Opportunities Fund, call December 31, 1996. 1 Phil Grabowski 643-7736 or 1 Mike Tamaki 643-7360 for mail/fax this coupon to %_ Return § 2200-609 Granville St., #1. Multiple 1 Vancouver, B.C. V7Y 1H2 | Telephone Gpportunities Fax: 643-7795 a Fund 42.06% $5,786 a ee en ere (% Rate af rt nd Vl of igi Wf MULTIPLE OPPORTUNITIES FUNI £ imeestinent) oo. . ; $1,000 investinent) “Nie indicated rates of eetim ane the historical annnal compouuwted total returns for the indicated periods ended on December 31,1996 including cages in unit value aml reinvestment of all distributions and do not like into account sides or any optional charges payable by any unithalder which would have reduced eotums. Unit valie and investment retin will fluctuate, FT Address § City ' Postal Code Fund Value Current Fund Assets - 316.7 million Mabtiple Opportunities Fuod is sold by pruspectis only. Important information about Multiple Opportunities Fund is contained! in its prospectus, A copy may be obtained from Gauecon) Capital Goqpanition (601-013-7300, 2200 - O09 Granville Street, Vancouver, BC, V7Y TE). Prospective investors should rece the prospectas canfully befune investing, ‘We indicated performance data represents joist perfomance and is not indicative of future performance,