Great Bear Rainforest: Argument Analysis

Example:

Stakeholder Evaluation Form
Position, Argument, Analysis

Name of Stakeholder: Paul McDonald
Organization: Friends of the Great Bear Rainforest
Position:
- present development of the Great Bear Rainforest is unsustainable
- clear cutting destroys wildlife habitat
- not against forestry, but there needs to be a land protection plan

Argument: examples, quotes, that support the stakeholder’s position
- 60% of the Great Bear needs to be protected—key watersheds and habitats
- remaining 40% of the rainforest needs sustainable forestry practice
- conservation-based economy for communities

Analysis: your analysis and/or explanation of the argument
In Paul’s argument, he doesn’t give specific evidence as to why 60% of the rainforest needs to be
protected to maintain biodiversity. It seems like he just picked a number out of the air without any scientific basis. He also doesn’t explain why clear-cutting is not acceptable in some areas of the rainforest.
But I did like his thought that better forestry practices are needed and that the economy in the region should be conservation-based in order to help the communities become sustainable.

Stakeholder Evaluation Form #1
Position, Argument, Analysis

Name of Stakeholder: Julia Parsons
Organization: BC Forest Products
Position:
-forestry supports 80,000 direst jobs in BC
-changes to logging practices are not economically feasible
-logging contractors and lumber producers are struggling with the economic conditions

Argument: examples, quotes, that support the stakeholder’s position
-in order to save jobs we need to use environmentally sustainable ways like clear cutting
-BC Forest Products have a good record as good stewards of the environment
-They have been logging on the coast of British columbia for a hundred years

Analysis: your analysis and/or explanation of the argument
In Julia Parsons argument, she says that logging should be allowed in the Great bear region because if it weren't, the BC forestry industry would suffer greatly. If the government gives the forestry companies financial support, she is willing to change to more eco friendly logging practices. (100% unprotected) I don't like the fact that she isn't concerned for the environment at all.

Stakeholder Evaluation Form #2
Position, Argument, Analysis

Name of Stakeholder: Archie Starr
Organization: Coastal First Nations Representative
Position:
-the future of the Great Bear Rainforest must remain with the future of Coastal First Nations
-the agreement has to protect First Nations culture and traditions.
-area for First Nation food and ceremonies needs to be established
-50% of the Great Bear region needs to bring income and new sustainability and opportunity to FIrst Nation communities.

Argument: examples, quotes, that support the stakeholder’s position
-Conservation means more than wilderness protection
-Their participation is grounded in the ongoing negotiations for aboriginal rights in the region
-He is willing to have 50% unprotected and 50% protected

Analysis: your analysis and/or explanation of the argument
Archie Starr's argument has concerns for the environment, as well as the First Nations in the community to whom the land means a lot.
He believes that the Great Bear needs protection, but at the same time thinks that if it helps bring income to the First Nations communities, it will also be beneficial. He is willing to compromise by doing a 50/50 for unprotected land and protected land so there is a balance. I think he has a good vision for the Great Bear region, and how he found the balance which is good for the environment, as well as helping First Nation communities gain income from the region.

Stakeholder Evaluation Form #3
Position, Argument, Analysis

Name of Stakeholder: Elizabeth Chang
Organization: Earth Alert!
Position:
-Old growth forest like the Great Bear Rainforest should not be logged to produce products.
-we shouldn't let mineral exploration be done in biodiversity
areas.
-all 6.4 hectares should be protected.

Argument: examples, quotes, that support the stakeholder’s position
-By developing in the rainforest we put the ecosystem of the rainforest at risk.
-How can be allow development that will cause ecological extinction
-we should not agree to any compromises with regards to development in this rainforest.

Analysis: your analysis and/or explanation of the argument
Elizabeth Chang stands strong in her beliefs for the delicate Great Bear region to be 100% protected. She thinks that development in this area will destroy the wildlife habitat and watersheds. However, her argument does not show any concern for what will happen to BC's forestry industry and does not have an alternate plan for such concerns. The only concern she has is preserving the environment. I think that while environmental preservation is important, so is the BC forestry since it employs so many people and provides income as one of the main sources for BC.