Misleading facts

Dear editor:
The message that was conveyed in the Fort Frances Times last Wednesday (Nov. 25) is full of misleading facts.
Yes, facts, because Resolute used some truth to make themselves into the good guys. Their perception of themselves is not commonly shared by many. We still view them as the villain.
Does Resolute oppose an eSFL? Not really—if they become the controllers of the new licence and continue to harvest and control the ultimate destiny of the wood basket. That is their goal.
The fact that they state the discussion of an eSFL needs to take place in an orderly fashion is not different than their stated position that the eSFL needs to evolve over time. They wish to dictate the time frame and order.
Also true is the offer of “co-generation assets,” the biomass (the turbine was never mentioned in the discussions). The offer of fibre was mentioned on a five-year basis and going forward we would work something out.
In the MOU on the biomass asset, it was more than inferred that the Town would dismiss any desire of participation in the formation of an eSFL.
Ignace was never in the equation of the Crossroute eSFL—and should not be. We are concerned with the Crossroute and Sapawe Forests, which are in Rainy River District.
Resolute is increasing the high cost of fibre by adding an administration fee to the already high price, and directing “expensive wood” to its customers and “cherry picking” the closer, less expensive forest resources for its own assets.
What wood has been offered to any prospective buyers of the Fort Frances mill? There is no doubt that all prospective parties to a purchase have been offered the same arrangement, however, the “arrangement” offered must be so outrageous that all have walked from the table.
Too, no doubt that if Resolute is allowed to continue the harvest and delivery of wood, they will offer the raw product at their “true” inflated cost—if allowed. Who would do less?
If Resolute can continue to sell wood and fibre to any prospective buyer, surely they can offer the asset on a no-cost basis and retain the legacy costs.
Over time, they will recoup, through fiber and wood sales, the expense to clean up the legacy when the time comes, if they do not go out of business in the meantime.
They divested themselves of the power dams by “selling out” to a wholly-controlled entity of their own making. In time, when operations wind down in the forest, they could again sell out the local forest operations to an independent and sever any clean-up responsibility.
It is apparent that Resolute intends to consume most of the Crossroute and Sapawe Forests in the Thunder Bay region. Remembering that they stated that their view of lumber mills is that of garbage producers—and they are most interested in the garbage.
Lumber is a by-product. Everything else is destined for Thunder Bay.
Thunder Bay District has more wood and wood fibre available than does Rainy River District. As such, Thunder Bay should consume their portion of the forest.
The wood supply that has been dedicated to the Fort Frances mill should remain dedicated so that Rainy River District may continue to prosper for another 100 years and beyond.
(Signed),
Coun. Ken Perry
Fort Frances, Ont.