UBC Publications

UBC Publications

UBC Publications

UBC Reports Dec 4, 1969

Item Metadata


JSON: ubcreports-1.0117813.json
JSON-LD: ubcreports-1.0117813-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): ubcreports-1.0117813-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: ubcreports-1.0117813-rdf.json
Turtle: ubcreports-1.0117813-turtle.txt
N-Triples: ubcreports-1.0117813-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: ubcreports-1.0117813-source.json
Full Text

Full Text

Two Top
An eight-man committee has begun the
search for two master teachers at the University
of B.C.
The Master Teacher Awards, designed to
recognize two outstanding teachers of
undergraduates at UBC, have been established
by Dr. Walter Koerner, chairman of UBC's
Board of Governors, as a tribute to his brother,
Dr. Leon Koerner.
The first Master Teacher Award, announced
in December of last year, went to UBC's
president. Dr. Walter Gage. President Gage gave
the $5,000 prize which goes with the award to
the University for the purchase of books for
three campus libraries.
Dr. William C. Gibson, chairman of the
selection committee, said the committee had
this year decided to select two master teachers,
each of whom will receive $2,500.
"It was the feetmg-of thfr-e©mmittee," he
said, "based on letters received last year and
other discussions that the University should
move more quickly to recognize a greater
number of outstanding campus teachers. As a
result, two master teachers will be selected this
year and their names announced before the end
of March, 1970."
Candidates for the awards may be
nominated by students, alumni and faculty.
Nominations must be in writing in the form
outlined in the regulations governing the
Copies of the regulations are available at the
Office of Academic Planning, Main Mall North
Administration Building; at the Main Library
and the Sedgewick and Woodward Libraries and
at the AMS Office on the second floor of the
Student Union Building.
To be eligible for the award a candidate
must have held a full-time teaching
appointment at UBC for at least three years and
be teaching at present on the campus.
Nominees must have taught undergraduate
courses in the winter sessions while at UBC.
Letters of nomination must be sent to Dr.
R.M. Clark, secretary of the selection
committee, not later than Jan. 21,1970.
The following criteria should be borne in
mind in submitting nominations: Candidates
should have a comprehensive knowledge of the
subject, be habitually well prepared for class,
have enthusiasm for the subject and the
capacity to arouse enthusiasm among students,
establish good rapport with students and
encourage their participation in class, set high
standards, communicate effectively and utilize
methods of evaluation which search for
understanding of the subject by students rather
than just the ability to memorize.
Members of the selection committee, in
addition to Drs. Gibson and Clark are:
Chancellor Alan M. McGavin; Prof. Roy
Daniells, department of English, representing
President Gage; Dean of Women Mrs. Helen
McCrae, representing the donor; Mr. Nicholas
Omelusik, representing the Alumni Association
and students Miss Ann Jacobs, secretary of the
Students' Council, representing undergraduates,
art. Mr. Arthur Burgess, a graduate student in
physics representing graduates.
AL TIPMAN, fourth year metallurgy student, edits
the EUS-sponsored paper, The Cornerstone.
NEILL   BROWN,   a   sociology   student,   edits   the
fraternity-sponsored journal called TheRho.
A widespread feeling that the established student
newspaper, The Ubyssey, is not meeting the needs of
UBC students has resulted in the appearance this term
of two new student-initiated journals.
The new papers are The Rho, an eight-page tabloid
subsidized by the Inter-Fraternity Council, and The
Cornerstone, a four-page tabloid sponsored by the
Engineering Undergraduate Society.
In conversations with UBC Reports Neill Brown,
editor of The Rho, and Al Tipman, editor of The
Cornerstone, made these points:
—The Ubyssey is not meeting the needs of
students in terms of publicizing faculty activities and
airing a wide range of student viewpoints;
—The new papers are not attempting to compete
with The Ubyssey and
—The Alma Mater Society simply doesn't have the
resources to subsidize two opposing student papers
on the UBC campus.
(The latter point is a comment on the recent move
by the Students' Council requesting the Council's
finance committee to investigate the feasibility of
financing two newspapers, The Ubyssey and another
The EUS-sponsored paper, The Cornerstone, made
its first appearance on the campus Nov. 26, the day
before a two-hour meeting in the student Union
Building designed to air complaints against The
Ubyssey. (For a report on that meeting turn to Page
Cornerstone editor Al Tipman, a fourth-year
metallurgy student, told UBC Reports his newspaper
would serve as a spokesman for UBC's professional
"We're also planning to stay close to home,"
Tipman said, "in the sense that we plan to restrict our
reporting to campus activities."
He added that The Ubyssey lacks a sense of
humour and that this was one area The Cornerstone
planned to concentrate on.
Neither Tipman nor Duane Zilm, president of the
Engineering Undergraduate Society, expressed much
enthusiasm for a suggestion that The Rho and The
Cornerstone should amalgamate to produce a single
opposition newspaper to The Ubyssey.
Zilm says bluntly that there is another point of
view among students to that expressed in The
Ubyssey and that there is a need for a "more
representative" publication on the campus.
Zilm said the B.C. Association of Professional
Engineers had expressed an interest in subsidizing The
Rho editor Neill Brown said his newspaper began
as an attempt to improve the image of fraternities at
UBC. "As the- paper developed," he added, "it
became apparent that the important thing is to
express ideas in a different way."
He said there was widespread disenchantment with
the way The Ubyssey is expressing views and ideas.
"They've alienated themselves from the majority
through their shallow approach to issues," he said.
The Rho will make its columns available to
anyone, Brown said, but the basic philosophy of the
paper will be opposition to any ideology, which he
said "resulted in putting people into shackles."
He said the paper would not be an outlet for the
"silent majority," in the sense that it would reflect
only majority opinion among students. The Rho will
appeal to the majority, he said, because of the
content of the paper.
Brown said it was a "fallacy" to think that there
can be two opposing newspapers on the UBC campus.
"The people who advocate such a thing simply have
no awareness of the resources of money and people
that are needed to produce a paper," he said.
For the long-term Brown advocates an
amalgamation of all student newspapers at B.C.'s
publicly supported universities. Such a unified
student press, he believes, should publish a weekly
newspaper for distribution in the B.C. community.
In the final analysis, however, he believes the
growth of other newspapers on the UBC campus is
the result of the policies which The Ubyssey has
"In the past," he said, "differences of opinion
were expressed in terms of inter-faculty rivalries and
stunts. Perhaps what is happening is that these
differences are now being expressed in a political
sense and newspapers are a concrete expression of
that process."
On a more pessimistic note, Brown questioned
whether students really cared about newspapers.
"I think students have a disenchantment with the
printed word, right from textbooks through to
newspapers. There's a real hesitancy on their part to
accept anything that appears in a newspaper. Maybe
we're all on the wrong track." If
If :
&&*>  _> ";
'*>,   I
:l^"ll«\^«^-^!^l«^|^ent^b was elected to
y:rf^^^iPc^^^fB^ In an article in
:if^|g!^-«#^uyfeV 7, Mivtoh said
*f,%&d, cM^gui^tiy/pre ? of ve/
tie use to *
*;tri^;s^d,ident  vjj^v*   ah_   descteifed   the
:^td_ao^ti V^le;$n   SenateJKfone   of
,' 'ft^k^sh^."* Vol- •- 'ill
.';,^^ l^ri-Mri,Rush's term alpJfice as a
s^©iti-5§ett4tof expired in 0|t©$er of this
year^e announced that he wotti*i[ notstand
;. for, rejection, Th6 editors of UBC Reports
asked> him to' explain to Jhe University
community his reasons for* Arriving at thai
decision. His artfcte appears at rjght.
Other members of the«University
community are invited to comment on Mr.
Rush's article. Letters should Jae sent t^
The Editor, UBC Reports, tft$®Ma\\ North
Administration Building, Campus.
I <
I -°
2/UBC Reports/December 4, 1969 In a recent issue of The Centre magazine, a professor
of international relations, in an article entitled
"Government by Myth," argues that the American
government has directed its foreign policy by the
creation of fictions. He says that these fictions are now
part of the subconscious of the American people and
that they conceal any underlying explanation of that
policy. The American government is perhaps most guilty
of practicing a deception on its people but it is not the
only decision-making institution to do so. Many
examples can be offered of institutions with the
insidious facility of governing through myth-creation,
and I venture to suggest that one of the most striking is
4 our own UBC Senate.
The Senate—as the chief academic decision-making
entity at UBC—has built up certain fictions of its own.
These fictions relate to the Senate's purposes,
jurisdiction, composition and academic policy. These
fictions tend to distort popular conceptions about the
Senate's function in the University. They serve to
deceive not only the public but also the students and the
faculty as to the University's role in society.
The rationale for the development of popular
misconceptions about the Senate and the University
would seem to be the protection of the present
power-holders' control over the University and the
contj^^nce of their one-dimensional view of university
educawn. It is the mechanism by which the people
controlling the University, through their use of the
decision-making processes, in this case the Senate, assert
their primacy and declare that their view of university
education is the best one.
Critics who point out the hypocrisy of a body making
decisions for one set of facts but alleging to have done so
for another are attacked for threatening the established
order; their real crime is the penetration of the pall of
fictional rhetoric which hangs about "ordered"
decisions. Such is the fate of Senate critics.
"Furthermore, by invoking popular misconceptions about
itself, the Senate can thwart internal and external
challenges to its legitimacy as the authoritative academic
decision-making institution in the University.
WJ^t are these myths?
T^^Senate touts the inveterate concept of the
University as a community of scholars wherein
intellectual inquiry and the pursuit of truth are the
guiding objectives. Lofty ideals about the aims of the
university experience are promulgated to give the
student values for which to aim. President Gage, in
Tuum Est, exhorted freshmen "to assume your share of
the common burden of mankind's long endeavour
toward a better life" and he set the University up as the
place where you can shape your own thinking, and find
happiness doing it. This is the picture created for new
students and for the public by the Senate and its leaders.
That these are intellectual liberal fantasies and
fictions can be easily seen. The University's primary
function is the production of specially-trained graduates
which will have a high utility in the world profit
economy. Most University courses and curricula are
job-oriented. Witness how the professional schools have
exploded in the last five years. All of them have been
overrun by qualified people looking for specialized skills
which will allow them to compete in the work market.
Those disciplines whose courses are not job-oriented
provide the collateral cultural training for those that are,
and provide the man-power for the greatest surplus
graduate employer: the education industry.
It is an economic imperative that the University must
continue to be the training camp for the
corporate-industrial world. Highly-trained people with
fresh skills are needed to man the technological
mechanism at all its posts. The untrained and
ill-equipped are uneconomic and therefore not
em'ployable. Graduate unemployment, chiefly in the
arts,  increases every year. Without the high output of
skilled technicians from the universities the economy
would undoubtably depress and donations and
government aid to the universities would slowly dry up.
But this is not the concept of the University which
we get from our enobled Senators. Instead they deceive
us as to the meaning and purpose of a university
education. In the Report of the Senate Committee on
Long-Range Objectives three main academic goals are set
out: to preserve and extend knowledge, to develop the
individual and to serve the needs of society. While the
first two are expounded on eloquently the last one is
whitewashed. That the present University's main goal
and function is the manufacturing of technicians and
that it only serves a portion of society by doing so is
ignored by the report. The community and its students
are fed a phony concept of the University by the Senate.
In no way does this help the student to understand the
society and to gain an appreciation of his future place in
In debate and in its reports, the Senate has fabricated
the myth that its decisions are not political in nature,
nor should they be. The members of the Senate argue
that they make decisions on matters of academic policy
alone, and that they try to do so without political or
partisan considerations. They say that matters coming
before the Senate with political overtones are not
discussable, since academic policy-making is not a
political question, and it would allow external pressures
to shape Senate decisions.
By virtue of its statutory function in the University
the Senate is in a position which necessitates that its
decisions be made on a political level. When the Senate
decides that a new department in audiology should go
ahead only if there is a continuing source of revenue to
support it, that is a political question because that
money invariably comes from the government. When the
Senate introduces enrolment restrictions, that is a
political question. These are questions which cannot be
resolved without a consideration of the socio-economic
and political factors as well. The old bogey of "lack of
resources" is another way of assuming political
considerations in the argument.
The Senate uses the political label to exclude
deliberation and decisions on unpalatable issues,
otherwise known as issues which go against its own
political beliefs. The recent rejection by the Senate to
debate the issue of endorsation of the Viet Nam
Moratorium is a clear case in point. The Senate
leadership (if you are still wondering, I mean the deans
and the administration) declared the issue a political one
and not properly a question for the Senate. Ostensibly
what they were saying was that the issue was one to
which they were opposed and that they didn't want
their open opposition to be a matter of record.
But this is beside the point. The merits for supporting
the Moratorium were subsumed in the procedural matter
of whether it should be debated at all. There is no
dispute that the issue was a political one. But it is also a
social one with profound implications for the University,
and the academic lives of everyone in it. The war in Viet
Nam is the subject-matter of many of our courses, it is
the basis for scores of seminars and essays, and the
ideological questions which it raises have the greatest
significance for our academic lives through the social and
institutional challenges which it creates.
Indeed the war directly stimulates research in the
University and it sustains the economic momentum of
our country. Perhaps the Senate should not discuss
partisan issues but that is no reason for not discussing
political issues, issues with which, by the very nature of
the University in society, the University is inherently
The University is a social institution. Its academic
decisions have social consequences, which give rise to
social controversy. That makes them political. In
denying this the Senate deceives us as to its power and
The Senate perpetuates the myth, which it has
nourished over the years, of the University as a
democratic institution. Senate members assert that the
decisions affecting the University are made in a
democratic way and are representative of the
community-at-large. This operates to legitimize their
decision with the community.
The Senate is not representative of the University
proper and is not democratic in this sense. While half of
the members of the Senate are faculty-elected, only
faculty members with the position of assistant professor
and up may vote for the Senate nominees, thereby
excluding the more "inexperienced" and potentially
more radical teaching assistants and lecturers.* While the
students make up the second major interest grouping on
the campus they are allotted 12 seats out of 102. It
cannot be said in this sense that the Senate is
representative and academic decisions democratic.
Nor is the Senate representative of the community.
The alumni, the government and certain teaching groups
have representation in the Senate. But labor, the
farmers, the Indians, the unemployed and the welfare
victims all go unrepresented. In terms of community
interest groups only certain ones are graced with a
Senate position.
More importantly, the Senate is not representative of
the interests of the community. It does not serve all of
the people, but only those social interests which are
economically dominant. This does not mean to say that
the Senate power-holders are themselves the
economically powerful; this is clearly not the case for
most. It means that the Senate is out of necessity
responsive to the wishes and pressures of the business
community, and of those in that community who have
economic interests to protect and promote. When the
B.C. government provides most of the capital and
operating revenues for the University, how could the
University ignore the commercial bias of that
government in its decisions? When the federal
government makes research and scholarship money
available to the University it is hard to see how Ottawa
does not play a substantial role in determining the area
of study, certainly such a determination being
conditioned by the government's own reaction to
economic demands. When many professors hold down
part-time jobs as consultants in a variety of commercial
fields or are hired directly from the practical world of
profit motivation and human exploitation, it is hard to
see how their influence on the University both in the
classroom and as policy-makers in the Senate can be
anything but lopsided in favour of the vested business
There cannot be a democratic decision in a body
which consciously rejects the interests of the poor and
oppressed. That the University and the Senate serve the
interests of these people is a lie. That the University is a
democratic institution is a wicked fiction.
The Senate pushes a phony view of itself and the
University to the students and the community. We buy
the view because the phony promotion makes it seem
desirable and needed and because it shows no other. We
consume the view because we are convinced that it is
good for us. The myths of University government as
manufactured and distributed by the Senate through the
professors are embedded in our subconscious too. And
we pay for them too. Our price is alienation and
exploitation. And all because it is easy to accept their
*The University Senate has ruled that for the purpose of Senate
elections only those members of UBC's teaching staff who hold
"faculty" rank, i.e., assistant professor and above, may vote.
This does not, however, bar members of the teaching staff below
the rank of assistant professor from having faculty status by
ruling of the Faculty in which he or she teaches. In the Faculty
of Arts, for instance, faculty status has been extended to all
members of the Faculty, including full-time instructors, but not
teaching assistants, who are hired on a year-to-year basis.
Granting of faculty status by a specific Faculty would not,
however, entitle those persons below the rank of assistant
professor to vote in Senate elections. Ed.
UBC Reports/December 4, 1969/3 SUB DEBATE AIRS COMPLAINTS
Ubyssey Sails Serenely Through
The good ship Ubyssey, a little battered from
previous squalls, weathered another storm in the
Student Union Building last week.
With storm signals hoisted and all members of the
crew at action stations, the sprightly old girl turned
her bow to the wind and breasted the waves of
criticism with scarcely a creak or a shudder.
The occasion was a Nov. 27 public meeting
arranged by student ombudsman Sean McHugh to
discuss the role of the student newspaper and allow
The Ubyssey's critics to confront the paper's editors.
Three of The Ubyssey's top staffers—editor Mike
Finlay, news editor Paul Knox and writer and UBC
Senator Peter Ladner—had one over-riding message
for the 400 or so students who crowded the SUB
party room for the meeting—"If you want to beat us,
come and join us."
Both Finlay and Ladner gave this answer to
graduate student Ted Hewlett, who asked whether it
is proper that a small group of people should be given
the money of all the students to print things which
many students don't agree with, "for example, 'All
power to the NLF (the National Liberation Front of
Viet Nam).' "
Finlay's reply was blunt: "Come and work for the
paper and maybe in two or three years you'll be
editor and be able to express your views."
He said the only reward Ubyssey staffers get for
working on the paper "is presenting our views, trying
Here's a quick guide to the proliferating
campus press at the University of B.C.
THE UBYSSEY-Student newspaper
published twice a week (Tuesday and Friday)
with funds appropriated by the Alma Mater
Society. Press run—16,000 copies per issue.
Carries advertising. Editor-Mike Finlay.
UBC REPORTS-University newspaper
published weekly (Thursday) by the
Department of Information Services with funds
appropriated by the Board of Governors. Press
run—16,000 copies for campus issues appearing
on the first three Thursdays of each month,
about 70,000 copies for issue which appears on
the final Thursday of each month. (Last issue
each month is mailed to UBC graduates, parents
of all students and friends and donors). No
advertising. Editor—Jim Banham.
THE RHO—Monthly paper subsidized by the
UBC Inter-Fraternity Council. Press
run-10,000 copies, which will be cut to 7,000
in future as economy measure. No specific
publication day. Appears "when it's ready,"
according to editor Neill Brown. Carries
THE CORNERSTONE-Published every
three weeks with funds provided by the
Engineering Undergraduate Society. Press
run— 5,000 copies. (EUS president Duane Zilm
says press run will be doubled by the time the
third issue appears). Carries advertising.
Editor—Al Tipman.
to do something worthwile, trying to educate the
Hewlett replied that Finlay was missing the point.
"Do you think," he reiterated, "the student body
should subsidize the views of a small group."
"If they go to work to put out that publication,
certainly," Finlay shot back.
Both Hewlett and an unidentified student
suggested that the student paper should be subject to
the principles of the market place. In so many words
they were both saying that exposing the paper to the
free and open market was the only way of
determining whether the paper in its present form
was acceptable to the majority of students.
Senator Ladner, taking up Hewlett's criticisms,
first pointed out that five-sixths of The Ubyssey's
costs are paid for through advertising and that
4/UBC Reports/December 4, 1969
students each contribute one dollar a year to the
paper's operating costs.
"There are places where you can have your
opinion published if you are against the paper's
policies," Ladner continued. These are the letters to
the editor column and a column called "Forum" in
Page Friday. The latter outlet has been discontinued,
he said, because no one is submitting material.
"Another way you can get in is by joining the staff,"
Senator Ladner added.
"As long as you're a member of the NLF,"
Hewlett interjected.
Senator Ladner replied that it was not necessary to
be a member of the NLF.
"Just a supporter," Hewlett remarked.
"You don't have to be a supporter," Senator
Ladner replied. "I will honestly say this: anyone who
is a competent writer and administrator to some
extent can become editor of The Ubyssey. You do
not have to agree with the prevailing opinions of the
paper to become editor."
Another challenge to the editors came from David
Carrell, a fourth-year arts student who charged that
students who submitted critiques on The Ubyssey
were replied to by the editors in a cavalier and
arrogant manner. A number of radicals who had
dared to disagree with the editors in letters had been
treated with contempt, Carrell said.
Finlay said that he had replied to one critique
written by graduate student Stan Persky. "It's my
prerogative to do so," he said.
Referring to a second critique of The Ubyssey
written by the radical, left-wing Vancouver Student
Movement, Finlay characterized it as "quite long and
involved." He added: "I don't take the VSM
seriously. I'm sorry, but I just don't."
This brought fourth-year Arts student Elaine
Wismer, a VSM supporter, to the microphone to
accuse Finlay of authoritarianism and arrogance. "The
Ubyssey's stand is that the people are stupid and
what they're doing is meaningless," she said.
Finlay replied hotly that the VSM "presents one
line, one point of view, which they shove down your
throat." He said he was "a little tired of people who
come out and tell me how much more revolutionary
they are than anyone else."
David Zirnhelt, former president of the AMS set
the tone for the early part of the discussion by stating
that The Ubyssey "wants to have its cake and eat it
too. They want to be supported by students but they
don't want to be dictated to by the students or the
elected representatives of the students."
He suggested The Ubyssey should fight the general
apathy and alienation on the campus, act as an organ
of education on topics like Viet Nam and pollution,
act as a vehicle for publication of student research
results and encourage "politicization," which he
defined as "encouraging people to accept certain
political patterns."
He suggested that the AMS should agree on a fairly
specific role for the paper which could be referred to
by the AMS, by the paper's editors and students.
Finlay defended the paper's policies by saying that
The Ubyssey has been trying for years "to do
something about apathy on this campus and it just
doesn't work."
He said The Ubyssey had neither the manpower
nor the resources to deal with pollution. "We try to
educate people in things the downtown press cannot
or will not print."
The rumors that Students' Council was considering
a cut in The Ubyssey budget in order to subsidize
another campus paper didn't get an airing until the
latter part of the meeting.
■ ■■%#% Volume 15, No. 26-Dec. 4,
I 111 I 1969- Published by the Univer-
fl|lfll|sity of British Columbia and
^araaw^aT distributed free. J.A. Banham,
REPORTS Edjtor; Barbara Claghorn, Production Supervisor. Letters to the Editor
should be addressed to the Information Office,
UBC, Vancouver 8, B.C.
An unidentified student raised the matter by
asking "Is there any possibility that council is
considering dropping The Ubyssey's budget?" News
editor Knox was even more specific: "Has there been
any consideration of withdrawing some of The
Ubyssey's budget and giving it to other
AMS treasurer Chuck Campbell replied that the
Council's finance committee had been asked to
consider if it was possible to support two campus
Then he added: "We're not thinking of cutting
back on The Ubyssey's budget. They're getting
$4,000 more this year than they have in any year in
the past decade. The question is whether or not we
ought to support other papers and not whether we
should cut back on The Ubyssey's budget."
Set Aside
Three   more   areas  have  been  set  aside   by  the
provincial     government     as     ecological     reserves,
according    to    Dr.    Vladimir   J.    Krajina,    botany
professor at the University of B.C.
This brings to 16 the total of ecological reserves in
B.C.—tracts of land where scientists can study the
inter-relationship of plants and animals and their
undisturbed environment.
Biologists, foresters, soil scientists, geologists,
geomorphologists and micro-climatologists will be
able to unravel basic ecological rules which should
lead to a more planned and profitable use of our land.
Dr. Krajina is a member of the subcommittee on
Conservation of Terrestrial Communities under the
International Biological Program which Canada joined
in 1964. About 60 countries are participating in the
program. So far B.C. is leading other provinces and
most other countries in setting aside ecological
reserves. _|
"Some of the benefits from the reserves are*
obvious," Dr. Krajina said. "When Britain began her
afforestation program her original forest stands had
disappeared. Now her foresters must go ahead on a
trial and error basis. If some of the original forests
were still intact, the results of research would have
allowed them to plan the most effective and
economic program. By establishing our own
ecological reserves now, we will avoid the same bad
Dr. Krajina said the U.S. has been setting aside
ecological reserves in the past three years under the
initiative of the President and Congress.
Two of the new areas each cover about one square
mile. One is near Grayhurst in the Peace River area
and the other is at Soap Lake near Spences Bridge.
The third is a one-half-square-mile tract at Rose Point
on Graham Island, one of the Queen Charlotte
The areas were set aside by the provincial
Department of Lands, Forests and Water Resources
following the annual fall meeting of the B.C.
Ecological Reserves Committee at UBC Oct. 16. The
meeting was chaired by the deputy minister of the
department, Mr. David Borthwick, and was attended
by about 40 delegates and observers. Its main purpose
was to receive reports of the committee's 1969 field
The committee's work has the full support of the
Department of Lands, Forests and Water Resources
and the Department of Recreation and Conservation,
Dr. Krajina said. On the basis of surveys made this
year, the committee is hopeful that Victoria will
establish reserves on the Queen Charlotte Islands and
on Vancouver Island.
For the past two years committee members have
examined areas in the province which could be
suitable for ecological reserves. Dr. Krajina said that
the 15 established so far represent only a small
sample of the reserves necessary in the province.


Citation Scheme:


Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics



Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            async >
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:


Related Items