Lethbridge Herald (Newspaper) - February 1, 1973, Lethbridge, Alberta
4 ~ THE IETHBRIDGE HERALD - Thursday, February 1, 1973 Indian rights may show NDP hand By Maurice Western, Ottawa commentator for FP Publications Amalgamate Pass towns Amalgamation is a dirty word to many residents of the Crowsnest Pass. To others it spells opportunity and advancement. The pros and cons have been discussed for years with no solution in sight. One of the five communities in the eight-mile stretch of the Pass might be for it and the neighboring town against. It is bringing the towns together that presents the problem. Competition between the towns of the Pass has been going on for years. It seems to come to the fore every .time a new project is to be undertaken, such as the construction of a school or a nursing home, swimming pool or senior citizen's housing. Every Pass town thinks the project should be built in its community and these feelings are slow in susbsiding. An example of this competitive spirit was evidenced when Blairmore was chosen as the site for the new swimming pool opened last summer. The Pass communities have four mayors serving Frank, Coleman, Blairmore and Bellevue plus an administrator for Improvement District No. 5. This presents a duplication in administration costs in a pint-size radius. Groups of Pass residents have been preaching amalgamation for years with fluctuating response. A Unified Government Study Committee chaired at present by Dan De Cecco is keeping the subject alive. The provincial government in an effort to evaluate the net worth of each town in the Pass and determine the expenditure required to bring each town up to standard authorized the firm of Underwood and McLellan Associates to bring in a detailed study of the area. Their findings will be presented to the Pass councils at a meeting in the Frank Community hall on February 7. Whatever the view on the pros and cons of amalgamation one thing is certain - each of these small Pass communities needs the support of the other. There is no room for petty thinking if the economy of the area is to enjoy the current prosperous predictions for the east Kootenays and the Crowsnest Pass area. To remain divided with five administrations to be considered and pleased when one main administrative body could do the job is as foolish as setting up five school boards. The potential of the Pass has only been sampled. Suppliers of fuel and energy are looking to the Crowsnest for needed supplies. Transportation of these raw materials to waiting ports is of major concern and must be provided. The entire prosperous horizon could meet a formidable bottleneck if large concerns are faced with submitting to the wishes of five administrations before they can get their projects off the ground. A lasting birthday present A hundredth birthday isn't an everyday occasion, and it is certain that those fotunate enough to be on hand for Fort Macleod's 100th birthday next year will not be around for the next one. The importance of such a milestone should be recognized by the provincial government with a provincial grant available to a celebrating community. The money should be given with the provision that it be used for some lasting project which would be of benefit to the majority of the town's residents. It is certain Fort Macleod has many unfulfilled dreams and many projects yet unrealized. For this reason it would be well for the residents to be thinking of some useful addition to their community life which could be realized as the town's birthday present. Fort Macleod is blessed in that it has a swimming pool, arena, tennis court and many fine facilities, but there is room for improvement. Plans have been discussed to locate a new library within the former town hall offices with a Senior Citizen's Drop-In Centre planned for the town hall proper. Would not the realization of these two dreams present a wonderful centennnial project with direct benefit to all age groups With Fort Macleod's MLA L. E. Buckwell going off to the legislature soon townspeople should be giving him their suggestions for a project which would indeed make Fort Macleod's centennial one to be enjoyed by posterity. And with the news already out that somp 5,000 former Fort Macleod residents have indicated they will be back 'home' for the centennial how fitting it would be if the residents could proudly point out to them their birthday present. The priorities of universities By Peter Hunt What are the two greatest needs in university education today? The politician, �with a keen eye on his corporation masters and a genuflection towards his "one-eyed yellow idol" of progress (half-transmuted by the capitalist hindoo into 'adjustment' to the year 2000) will answer that question quite bluntly: What the universities need most is 'relevance' to the needs of the economy and greater efficiency. The first need is readily understood. The politician means, of course, that universities should come down to earth (or at least ground-level away from the Parnassian slopes) and concentrate on supplying manpower and manipulators for the technocracy. The second need obviously provokes the question: "What is efficiency?" And the politician's answer is essentially the same as that given to the question: "What is an efficient business?" Efficient business is built on economies of size. Big business is better than a multitude of small businesses. Mass production and specialization are characteristics of big, successful business. Universities offer a product: graduates. They also carry out research; and such research is bast performed by aggregations of specialists and most realistic when it reflects the needs of the technological economy and the socio-political status-quo. The campus politician, that strange hybrid Of academic and public-relations man, answers the question hi similar fashion but with these differences. He will say that, working on the premise that politics is the art of the possible, priorities have to be determined by a vector analysis of the pressures operating on the university. Two main pressures are the financial power of governments and the mass-consensus of the university's clientele. With his pocket bible (Clark Kerr's Uses of the University) to guide him, the university administrator will find comfort in the wisdom of statements like the following: "All fields are �qual, only some are more equal than others. There should be no effort to do the same things in the same amount in each field. Each should receive support in accordance with current potentialities and potentialities vary. There are no timeless priorities." Thus will the co-operative university administrator come to an understanding with those who govern him on the central issue of curriculum. The key phrase is "current potentialities" which, in Kerr's evolutionary view, means emphasis on those studies of that research which is best adapted to the current state of the technological society. For, according to Kerr: "the proc- OTTAWA - One of the more dangerous issues in the path of the minority government has been little noted up to the present although some ominous portents may be found in occasional skirmishes during question period. Anything that draws the Conservatives and New Democrats together is obviously a threat to the ministry. There are signs of such a convergence in distinctly hostile questions having to do with the policy of the federal government in regard to the James Bay project. This is a most delicate matter because the project is central to ess cannot be stopped. The results cannot be foreseen. It remains to adapt," the process referring, of course, to the expansion of the "knowledge industry" in its headlong career of integration with the rest of industry. "The university and sections of industry," says Kerr, "are becoming more alike and the professor, at least in the natural and social sciences, takes on the characteristics of the entrepreneur." Eventually, the 'city of intellect' (the multiversity), pronounces Kerr, merges with megalopolis. And the adapting theologians such as Teilhard de Chardin, with his evolutionary 'omega point* optimism, and Harvey Cox with his absurd 'secular city' thesis, grease the runners for the great slide into the millenium. Should the university leader pursue the Kerr gospel further, he will find ample consolation about dissent and unrest. Kerr will tell him that even radical critique and dissent is part of the progress the multiversity helps to bring about, for modern industrial society is kept intact by a consensus within a 'managerial pluralism' in which intellectuals play a leading part. "The Western tradition," says Kerr, "has been to harness the drive of individual se'ff-interest," and the influence of students and intellectuals "points in the direction of new evolutionary growth.". Thus, the multiversity masters find it easy to integrate both external and internal pressures. ------- But what answer would anyone who holds to an 'idea of the university' in the tradition of the true Western ethic give to the question about university needs? It seems to me that there would be two central imperatives. They are: decentralism in the guild spirit and a passion for ideas. Neither really flourishes in North America today. Smaller universities are disappearing under pressure of governments advised by academic commissions. The passion for ideas cannot flourish in non-communal institutions, especially where relativism prevails, as it must do when the 'adapting' mentality is dominant. Is it likely that the emerging multiversities in Canada, for instance, will be as effective in developing talent and disseminating ideas as say, Antigonish, Dalhousie and New Brunswick have been in the past? The answer is clear to those who believe, with T. S. Eliot, that religion and diversity of cultural patterns are essential to creative intellect, and that the guild spirit from which universities sprang is not a manufactured thine. the long term economic plans of the Bourassa' government in Quebec City. But it is controversial inside and outside the province for a variety of reasons and important federal interests are.plainly affected. The first hint in this session of opposition interest came on Jan. 10 when Flora MacDonald inquired whether the federal government was represented at the interlocutory injunction hearings in Montreal. At these sessions, which have attracted much publicity, the northern Crees and Eskimos have been seeking to halt development work by two Quebec Crown cor- porations and subcontracting companies. Otto Lang replied that the government is not now represented as a party to the proceedings. He indicated that the department of justice advises other departments with respect to the legal aspect of the government's responsibility. Mr. Lang declined to say whether the government had formulated a position on the issue. There followed a series of rather fierce interchanges between Frank Howard of Slkeena, the veteran Indian affairs critic of the NDP and Jean Chretien, minister of Indian affairs and northern development. Mr. Howard declared that the fundamental question involved was that of aboriginal rights and charged that the government "has obviously denied and abnegated (its) constitutional responsibility." Mr. Chretien's response was: "Regarding the cases that are before the court, we are not present there because, according to the new government policy, we do not want to substitute ourselves (for) the Indians, who are quite able to defend their rights. As it has been realized, we have made available to the Indians and Inuits all the IF WJ?E fifllKfi "TO WE MT MRU* LIKE My CHOICE OF EHDS/ EWJOHTOtt vTOORVlftl. Letters to the editor Contrasting reactions to Andy Russell article Mr. Russell's report on the proposed coal development in the Oldman River watershed area was interesting. However, for a man of his reputation, as a conservationist and ecologist to resort to scare tactics and extreme exaggeration was unfortunate, and a disservice to himself, to the Alberta government, to the mining company concerned, and to the residents of southern Alberta. Contrary to Mr. Russell's stated opinion, information concerning this proposed development has been available to the public for several years, and in no way has there been an attempt made by any company or government agency concerned to keep the project secret. Under Alberta law there are rigid procedures that must be followed by any individual or mining company planning a development of this nature . . . To infer that mining companies are responsible for the disappearance of game in the mountains is both irresponsible and sheer fallacy. Over-hunting (and big-game outfitters and guides are partly responsible for ...this); over - grazing of whiter pasture by cattle in the forest reserves in the summers; recreational developments in the forest reserves, such as the West Castle Ski Resort; and extensive logging operations in the mountain valleys have all -contributed to the decline in game populations. Logging operations are probably the worst offenders, by destroying game habitat in the mountain valleys, and by causing fast runoff and erosion in the spring. It__is __unfflr�unaifl_ th^t the-timber cannot be harvested without the complete destruction that we see in the Castle River-Carbondale Lost Creek areas. Timber is a renewable resource, and if we are to have lumber for construction, the timber must be harvested. Over-hunting can be controlled - there is now no open season on grizzlies or mountain goat in this part of the province, and sheep hunting has been restricted to residents only. The elk herds pose a problem in the winters for the foothills rancher. This might be helped by restricting the num-ber of cattle allowed in the forest reserves in the summers, but this would be a hardship on the rancher who needs the sum- mer graze. Cattle, in addition to eating the winter feed of the game animals, also aggravate the bear situation, and actually pose a threat to the survival of the grizzly, who unfortunately for himself, finds a domestic cow, calf, or bull much easier to kill than a deer, elk or moose. As a result, the grizzly has been shot and trapped by the foothills rancher and stock rider. Cattle are also somewhat detrimental to a recreational area. It is now almost mandatory to carry a shovel to remove the manure from campsites by the streams in the forest reserves. The creek waters in most of the forest reserve streams are polluted by the same cattle. It is extremely doubtful, in view of the rigid control and supervision maintained over such operations by the Alberta government, if fishing in the streams adjacent to the strip mine and in the downstream areas will be affected at all. With respect to fishing in Alberta, I would point out that _J*re only reason we have any fish at all in our southern Alberta streams and lakes is because of the fish stocking program maintained by the Alberta department of fish and game, and the parks department in the national parks. Modern mining leaves very little defacement in the area mined. Rubble and waste are returned underground or into the pit, and when the mining is completed, the entire area is landscaped. Mr. Russell gives the impression that he is opposed to any -seising or any type of industry in or near the mountains. We need mining and the related industries in this country, with our high rate of unemployment. It would be interesting to know the reaction of the miners and other residents of t h e Crowsnest Pass to any sugges> tlon that the mines there be eliminated . . . In my opinion, both the Old-man River watershed project, and the Flathead Valley project, will be a distinct and beneficial asset to the economy of south - western Alberta and south-eastern British Columbia, and will in no way destroy the beauty or the ecology of the areas concerned. FRANK GOBLE Waterton Park The recent articles in T h e Herald by Andy Russell regarding the use of poison baits for coyotes and the proposed strip mines in the Oldman River headwaters are very accurate and timely pieces. I only hope that Albertans will realize the seriousness of these situations at long last and do something about them . . . With the sad example of Grande Cache already before us it is amazing that any government would dare to suggest a repeat of that blunder, but here we go again. The taxpayers of Alberta paid an utterly fantastic price to build the town of Grande Cache, put in a railway for delivery of the coal, hired a bunch of outsiders for miners and then gave away the coal for ten or fifteen cents a ton royalty. The railbed was severely damaged by floods and the repair bill is estimated in the millions of dollars, full cost for which will be borne by taxpayers regardless of who does the repair work. To add to the agony the government is also building a road from Grande Cache to Grande Prairie, a final stroke of extravagance to prove to the world, I suppose, that we have money to bum NOW. The details of this tremen-lous waste have always been well hidden from public scrutiny even during the last election. We can be thankful we have individuals such as Andy Russell who aren't afraid to step on a few high-priced toes and bring these issues into the open . . . As for environmental damage, strip mining is just like lumbering in that there is no "nice" way to do it. Carried out under the most, stringent regulations both these industries wreak irreparable damage to land, water and wildlife. The benefits they produce are of a relatively short duration compared to the permanent destruction they leave behind. With our modern standard of living allowing us more and So They Say If only one point of view is to be taught concerning controversial issues, whose viewpoint should be used? . -Dr. Frank E. Colaw, St. Charles, Mo., schools superintendent more time and money to spend on recreation, it is not too difficult to look ahead a few years to the day when the recreational demands on our mountainous areas will far outweigh industrial requirements. This h?s already happened in the U.S. but fortunately they have set up many parks, wilderness areas, and sanctuaries. All we have in Alberta is the government's "multiple use policy" which means that the industrial sector gets first grab at any lands they want and whatever is left is graciously opened to the public to "enjoy." It should be obvious to residents of this province that we cannot trust government to support anything that doesn't produce in the terms of progress and development. Conservationists and outdoorsmen traditionally must fight politicians and industrialists, making tiny gains for tremendous losses. It is not right to leave the whole battle to one or two people like Mr. Russell. Public opinion is a formidable weapon but only if it is brought to bear on what are supposed to be public servants and not dictators. If you are satisfied with throwing away your tax money on another Grande Cache, if you don't mind selling out another chunk of the province to foreign interests, if you don't mind letting our mountains remain a playground for industrial interests instead of hunters, fishermen, campers, etc., then you need do nothing and that's what you will end up with. If any of the preceeding points bother you then take up your pen and make your opinions known to your MLA, the minister responsible and the premier. Remeber you are 20 years late aiready. JEFF HICKISS Hardieville documents needed and some officials of my department have even gone to court yesterday as witnesses." The minister did not reply directly to a request by Erik Nielsen for a general statement of intention by the governmnet with respect to the settlement of aboriginal land claims in this country. On Friday Miss MacDonald returned to the attack. Addressing the prime minister, she asked: "In light of the great concern of Canadians and the clearly defined constitutional responsibilities of the federal government, which binds the government to protecting the Indian people, can the prime minister tell the house when the government will present a statement to the interlocutory hearings on the James Bay hydro project, outlining the government's position on the rights of northern Quebec Indians?" Mr. Trudeau replied, rather vaguely, that this had been stated by Mr. Chretien; that representatives were present at the hearings and that he knew of no statements to be made by the government. Asked if it was policy not to declare a position, Otto Lang indicated that it would be inappropriate for comments to be made on proceedings in which "we are not involved directly." Reminded that the National Indian Brotherhood and member organizations had been seeking a clear government statement, Mr. Lang referred-also vaguely-to "some of the very clear statements which the minister of Indian affairs has made." For the NDP on Friday, Tom Bamett of Comox-Alberni put this very sticky question: "I would like to ask whether the Government of Canada ha3 asked the Government of Quebec to comply with the terms of the agreement under which these territories were transferred to the jurisdiction of that province." (This happened in 1912 and the terms had specific reference to Indian rights). Len Marchand, the parliamentary secretary, indicated that Mr. Chre'Vn, who is still in hospital, is giving the matter most serious attention. The government has always insisted that it would respect treaty rights. On aboriginal rights-of interest to those such as the Quebsc Crees and Inuits who never had treaties-it has been considerably less positive. The prime minister at the outset was critical of the concept; whether his view has changed is not known. There are difficulties also about the theory that it would be paternalistic to intervene in the James Bay case. Federal governments have quite frequently intervened to protect non-Indian groups-creditors, Chinese, newspapers, logging interests and so on-against doubtful provincial legislation. Why is such action paternalistic if Indians are involved but not paternalistic in other cases? The James Bay controversy differs in important respects from earlier Ottawa-Quebec disagreements affecting the native peoples. While it has excited interest across the country, it is fair to say that the focus of opposition is inside the province. For many weeks Montreal newspapers have been flooded with protesting letters from angry readers. Not all of the criticism is based on concern for native rights. The project has been assailed for its probable effects on the environment. It has been attacked as unduly costly; compared unfavorably with alternative investments in nuclear power. One trenchant critic is Rene Levesque and it would be grossly unfair to accuse him of any particular tenderness for the non-whites of northern Quebec. Even with this divided Quebec opinion, however, the federal government is obviously moving in the matter with all the caution of a man crossing a minefield. Whether a serious Conservative attack is impending is not yet clear; Robert Stanfield, presumably, has even more reason for wariness in divisive Quebec issues than the Liberal government. But Miss MacDon-ald's probing questions may be clearing the ground for an assault. If so, the government's position would be difficult for the issues involved-as clearly indicated by Mr. Howard's attack and Mr. Barnett's searching question-are of such a nature that the NDP could scarcely be neutral. The Lethbridcge Herald 504 7th St. S:, Lethbridge, Alberta LETHiiRIDGE HERALD no. LTD., Proprietors and Publisher! Published 1905 1954, by Hon. W. A. BUCHANAN Second Class Mall Registration No. 0012 Aember of The Caneilan Press and the Canadian Dally Newspacar Publishers' Association and the Audit Bureau of Circulations CLEO W. MOWERS, Editor and Publisher THOMAS H. ADAMS, General Manager DON PILLING WILLIAM HAY Managing Editor Associate Editor HOY F. MILES OOUGLAi K. WALKER Advertising Manager Editorial Paga Editor "THE HERALD SERVES THE SOUTH"