Natural History, Environment and Education
Visit Me! (If you dare...)
A musical celebration of the wonders of biology, including evolution, natural selection, DNA, and more. Featuring David Attenborough, Richard Dawkins and Bill Nye. “The Greatest Show on Earth” is the 13th video in the Symphony of Science music videos series.”
Visit http://symphonyofscience.com for more videos.
WildAid has been leading the defence of sharks, mounting a campaign against the finning of sharks for a mere bowl of soup. But it is not only sharks that are under threat. Lately, ‘traditional’ chinese health practitioners have been advocating the use of manta gills for ‘cleansing and cooling‘ the blood. Now these magnificent creatures are also under threat.
View in HD full screen:
Visit WildAid and Manta Ray of Hope for more information.
Recently, Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver, wrote an open letter claiming that ”...foreign special interest groups“ (sounds like Assad?) are opposing the Northern Gateway pipeline. He is singing the tune of the absurd Ethical Oil group (who won’t reveal who they are supported by), not mentioning that Enbridge’s initial supporter for the pipeline was the Chinese company Sinopec; and that the oil will be shipped to a country whose human rights record can only be considered as unethical. As usual the Conservatives are displaying new and massive levels of hypocrisy.
Let Elizabeth May have a word: here is her Open Letter to Joe…
Dear Joe,
Your letter caught my attention. I respect you and like you a lot as a colleague in the House. Unfortunately, I think your role as Minister of Natural Resources has been hijacked by the PMO spin machine. The PMO is, in turn, hijacked by the foreign oil lobby. You are, as Minister of Natural Resources, in a decision-making, judge-like role. You should not have signed such a hyperbolic rant.
I have reproduced a short section of your letter. The idea that First Nations, conservation groups, and individuals opposed to the Northern Gateway pipeline are opposed to all forestry, mining, hydro-electric and gas is not supported by the facts. I am one of those opposed to the Northern Gateway pipeline. I do not oppose all development; neither does the Green Party; neither do environmental NGOS; neither do First Nations.
I oppose the Northern Gateway pipeline for a number of reasons, beginning with the fact that the project requires over-turning the current moratorium on oil tanker traffic on the British Columbia coastline. The federal-provincial oil tanker moratorium has been in place for decades. As former Industry Canada deputy minister Harry Swain pointed out in today’s Globe and Mail, moving oil tankers through 300 km of perilous navigation in highly energetic tidal conditions is a bad choice. In December 2010, the government’s own Commissioner for the Environment, within the Office of the Auditor General, reported that Canada lacked the tools to respond to an oil spill. These are legitimate concerns.
Furthermore, running a pipeline through British Columbia’s northern wilderness, particularly globally significant areas such as the Great Bear Rainforest, is a bad idea. Nearly 1200 kilometers of pipeline through wilderness and First Nations territory is not something that can be fast-tracked.
Most fundamentally, shipping unprocessed bitumen crude out of Canada has been attacked by the biggest of Canada’s energy labour unions, the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada, as a bad idea. The CEP estimates it means exporting 40,000 jobs out of Canada (figure based on jobs lost through the Keystone Pipeline). They prefer refining the crude here in Canada. (The CEP is also not a group to which your allegation that opponents of Gateway also oppose all forestry, mining, oil, gas, etc is anything but absurd.)
The repeated attacks on environmental review by your government merit mention. The federal law for environmental review was first introduced under the Mulroney government. Your government has dealt repeated blows to the process, both through legislative changes, shoved through in the 2010 omnibus budget bill, and through budget cuts. In today’s letter, you essentially ridicule the process through a misleading example. Your citation of “a temporary ice arena on a frozen pond in Banff” requiring federal review was clearly intended to create the impression that the scope of federal review had reached absurd levels. You neglected to mention that the arena was within the National Park. That is the only reason the federal government was involved. It was required by the National Parks Act. The fact that the arena approval took only two months shows the system works quite well.
Perhaps most disturbing in the letter is the description of opposition to the Northern Gateway pipeline as coming from “environmental and other radical groups.” Nowhere in your letter do you mention First Nations. (I notice you mention “Aboriginal communities,” but First Nations require the appropriate respect that they represent a level of government, not merely individuals within communities.)
The federal government has a constitutional responsibility to respect First Nations sovereignty and protect their interests. It is a nation to nation relationship. To denigrate their opposition to the project by lumping it in with what you describe (twice) as “radical” groups is as unhelpful to those relationships as it is inaccurate.
“Radical” is defined as “relating to or affecting the fundamental nature of something; far-reaching or thorough.” (Merriam Webster).
By that definition, it is not First Nations, conservation groups or individual opponents that are radical. They seek to protect the fundamental nature of the wilderness of northern British Columbia, the ecological health of British Columbia coastal eco-systems, and the integrity of impartial environmental review. It is your government that is radical by proposing quite radical alteration of those values.
Your government has failed to present an energy strategy to Canada. We have no energy policy. We are still importing more than half of the oil we use. Further, we have no plan to reduce dependency on fossil fuels, even as we sign on to global statements about the need to keep greenhouse gases from rising above 450 ppm in the atmosphere to keep global average temperatures from exceeding a growth of 2 degrees C. The climate crisis imperils our future – including our economic future – in fundamental ways which your government ignores.
By characterizing this issue as environmental radicals versus Canada’s future prosperity you have done a grave disservice to the development of sensible public policy. There are other ways to diversify Canada’s energy markets. There are other routes, other projects, and most fundamentally other forms of energy.
I urge you to protect your good name and refuse to sign such unworthy and inaccurate missives in the future.
Sincerely,
Elizabeth May, O.C.
Member of Parliament
Saanich-Gulf IslandsLeader
Green Party of Canada
Disturbing news about Asia Pulp and Paper, from this Dec14 news release from WWF:
On December 14, 2011, WWF partner Eyes on the Forest released a new report titled “The Truth Behind APP’s Greenwash.” The report includes evidence that Asia Pulp and Paper (APP) continues to clear cut tiger forests in Sumatra, Indonesia. These areas are within the boundaries of land the company claims to protect.
Through field investigations in June and October 2011 and satellite image analysis up to June 2011, Eyes on the Forest found that the APP supplier, PT Ruas Utama Jaya, has been clear cutting tropical forests inside the Senepis Tiger Sanctuary.
Fact Versus Pulp Fiction
The investigation shows a tiger sanctuary reality vastly different from APP’s claims. Key findings from the report conclude:
- APP has pulped an estimate of almost 5 million acres of Indonesia’s tropical forests since it started paper production there in 1984
- APP has continued clear cutting forests including elephant, tiger and orangutan habitat despite displaying an environmentally responsible image in the media
- 86% of the tiger area that APP claims responsibility for conserving is already under protection through Forest Stewardship Council-certified partners
- APP’s required reporting of greenhouse gas emissions—both from deforestation and the draining of swampy peatlands for agriculture—could be more than 500 times what the company claims
- An APP wood supplier is clear cutting within the Senepsis Tiger Sanctuary—an area APP claims it protects
APP sells office paper, paper-based packaging and other paper products. They are also expanding globally into tissue products like toilet paper, including brand names such as Paseo, which is available on many U.S. supermarket shelves.
APP has failed to reduce the impact of their operations in Sumatra despite attempts over several years to engage them in seeking solutions. WWF now works with global companies that buy pulp and paper from Indonesia to ensure their supply chain is sourced sustainably. By seeking responsibly sourced materials these companies will ensure that they are not responsible for the continued destruction of Indonesia’s tropical forests and the homes of Sumatra’s last surviving tigers.
What can you do?
Look at the products you buy and the choices you make. You can be the voice and take action to:Learn More
Read the full Eyes on the Forest report (PDF, 7.82 MB)
For Companies Only: Paper Tools and Guidance for Buyers and Producers
What I wish I had when I was a kid…
A new book on evolution, aimed at children in grades 4 to 8, and officially sanctified with an introduction by Jerry Coyne!
Click on the image to check it out…
Support the shark fin ban in Canada .
Find your member of Parliament, and give them a piece of your mind.
And if you can, support the work of WildAid.
Hainan is a tropical island in the South-China Sea, and its forests are being devastated by illegal logging. Will China enforce protection of the forests in Bawangling National Nature Reserve so that the Hainan gibbon can survive?
Feed Select
