The post Elizabeth May: The B.C. salmon season of 2019 was a disaster appeared first on Elizabeth May.

According to a leaked internal memo, three elements of the Salmonid Enhancement Program (SEP) are being cut without proper consultation, and include:

• the education and community support programs;
• the resource restoration components, and
• Steelhead and Cutthroat trout production at hatcheries.

“If true, this decision is devastating to conservation organizations in BC like Peninsula Streams Society that have worked hard in partnership with DFO to save Pacific salmon runs and educate on salmon conservation,” said Ms. May. “I call on Minister of Fisheries and Oceans Dominic Leblanc to reverse these cuts and allow salmon conservation organizations on the Pacific coast to continue their excellent and critical work.”

The post DFO quietly cuts funding to key Pacific salmon programs appeared first on Elizabeth May.

By Green Party Leader Elizabeth May, Green MP Bruce Hyer

What is an environmental issue? However you define it, Harper is against it.

“Environment” means different things to different people.

To some, it is the natural world for which conservation values will protect sustainable populations and ecosystems for future generations. The roots of that conservation ethic go back to the late 1800s, and Gifford Pinchot, the first dean of Yale School of Forestry. The ethic embraces “sustainable use” of forests and fish and the renewable resources that have supported economies.

Then, there’s the more modern concept of environment, stemming from Silent Spring, by Rachel Carson, published in 1962 and credited with helping launch the environmental movement in the U.S. The 1960s era of environmental awareness was actually more concerned with how human activity and new technologies-in this case toxic synthetic pesticides-threatened species, but perhaps more significantly, human health as well. Now that the publication of Silent Spring has passed the 50-year mark, it hardly is “modern” anymore. Our current use of the term “environment” has increasingly been subsumed in the media into one issue only-climate change.

Yet, climate change is not primarily an environmental issue. Sure, it involves the environment. In the same way drowning involves water, but we do not describe drowning as a “water issue.” Climate change, like drowning, is a survival issue. Climate change is an issue that can be described best as a security threat-although it involves questions of energy, economy, and the environment.

The harsh reality of our current political climate is that all the basic notions of the environment are under assault. We have entered a political era of “decision-based evidence making.” Stephen Harper’s administration has launched an unprecedented assault on government science. More than 2,000 scientists and researchers in the federal civil service have lost their jobs. Most of these scientists were working in areas of the “environment.”

All the scientists working in our national parks have been laid off. Fisheries and Oceans has lost all its habitat specialists after Bill C-38 gutted the Fisheries Act to remove habitat protection. The entire Marine Contaminants Program at DFO has been eliminated. The list is long. Mr. Harper is not just neglecting science; he is attacking any science or data or evidence that runs contrary to his beliefs or agenda.

Meanwhile, even though the only legislative change Harper has made to the Species at Risk Act was to remove the application of SARA when a pipeline is involved (also in C-38), still SARA is being more broadly undermined. Species at risk are going unprotected.

National parks no longer exclude oil and gas activity (with the tragic circumstances of the creation of Sable Island National Park.) This could be the thin end of the wedge for industrial activity in parks, in general. Meanwhile, parks are being privatized piecemeal, as is clear from the Jasper National Park “ice walk,” the Banff hot springs, and now a hotel proposal inside the national park in Jasper. Harper may have expanded national park boundaries, but he has endangered the protection of what lies inside the boundaries.

The pressure to clear away any regulatory hurdles to oil and gas expansion has led to the wholesale dismantling of decades’ worth of environmental laws and regulation. From legislation passed under prime minister John A. Macdonald (Fisheries Act and Navigable Waters Protection Act) to laws passed under former prime minister Brian Mulroney, (the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act and National Round Table on Environment and Economy), nothing is sacred. The last eight years bear witness to a devastating reversal of environmental law in Canada. It needs to be said that Canada’s laws never were as strong in environmental protection as those of the U.S. or other industrialized countries, such as Germany. In the race for the bottom, Canada has no competition.

Nowhere is the abdication of environmental responsibility as disturbing as in the area of climate change. Harper first cancelled our legally binding Kyoto targets, then withdrew from the treaty, adopted his own targets for GHG reductions in Copenhagen in 2009, and has now declared those will not be met either. True, he has not actually declared his rejection of his own targets, but the new timeline for oil and gas regulations, first promised when John Baird was environment minister nearly seven years ago (The “Turning the Corner” plan), make it clear no real effort is contemplated.

We all use oil. We will for a long time to come, but it must be used wisely, and we should all seek to reduce our consumption as much as possible, and shift to more renewable and sustainable energy sources. The sad and dispiriting irony is that if Canada embraced real action, we will create more jobs and revitalize our economy faster than by pursuing the mindless vision that puts all our eggs in the bitumen basket. Canada deserves better. We deserve an energy plan, a climate plan, and the new industrial revolution of clean-tech and renewables. We can still get there from here. The first step is for Prime Minister Stephen Harper to get out of the way.

Green Party Leader Elizabeth May represents Saanich- Gulf Islands, B.C., and Green Party MP Bruce Hyer represents Thunder Bay-Superior North, Ont.

Originally published in the Hill Times.

The post Climate change also a security threat appeared first on Elizabeth May.

I had planned a media availability session at the unfortunate time of Friday afternoon at 4pm, as it was the only time when I wasn’t busy in meetings. By complete fluke, Minister of Foreign Affairs, John Baird, came to Washington, DC the same day and held a joint press conference with US Secretary of State John Kerry at 2pm. Thanks to Minister Baird, my press conference was perfectly timed and a ton of media showed up. In the Twitter world, this could all be explained with #synchronicity.

And further to my last column, President Barack Obama did indeed make climate action a significant part of his State of the Union address. While the Globe and Mail described this as a ‘surprise’, readers of Island Tides were likely not surprised.

Though there is much to share about events in Washington, new developments in the repression of Canadian science are more urgent. ‘Chilling’ is the word that has been used in media reports, and ‘chilling’ it is.

Back in October 2011, I wrote in Island Tides about the muzzling of DFO scientists. The scientist in question, Dr Kristi Miller, had achieved levels of scientific respect as her work on viruses linked to salmon aquaculture operations had been published in the internationally prestigious journal Science. When Science attempted to arrange media interviews with Dr Miller, the Privy Council Office ordered her to refuse.

It seems that the public outcry over that event, and others including ozone scientists at Environment Canada, led the Prime Minister’s Office to decide the contractual arrangements with scientists were too lax. As of February 1 this year, new rules were put in place requiring all scientists working on projects in conjunction with DFO in the Central and Arctic Region to treat all information as proprietary to DFO, and—worse—await departmental approval before submitting research to any scientific journals.

The story was broken by veteran journalist Michael Harris, in the online journal iPolitics. Harris has been one of the few journalists willing to dig into the pervasive repression, slashing of science and rejection of evidence based decision-making in Harper’s Ottawa.

The reaction from DFO was swift. It posted this attack on its website:

‘The iPolitics story by Michael Harris published on February 7th, 2013 is untrue. There have been no changes to the Department’s publication policy.’

Harris recounts that he was stunned. He had verified the change with several scientists, external to DFO. He called Dr Jeff Hutchings at Dalhousie University who re-confirmed the changes. Then Harris received support from an unexpected source—an anonymous DFO scientist posted the email from Michelle Wheatley, the Central and Arctic science director, sent out to detail the new publication policy.

The anonymous scientist wrote, ‘Here is the e-mail I got from my division manager on January 29, 2013: ‘Subject: New Publication Review Committee (PRC) Procedures for C&A Science …’. The email was reproduced in full, and began, ‘This message is regarding the new Publication Review Committee procedures for C&A Science…’

The email noted that the new policy was to take effect on February 1, 2013.

The anonymous scientist concluded: ‘You decide who’s being untruthful.’

A few days after DFO tried to deny that there were any changes, the Vancouver Sun broke the story of a US scientist, doing collaborative work with DFO, who is refusing to sign the new conditions. Calling it a ‘potential muzzle,’ Dr Andreas Muenchow, of the University of Delaware told the Sun, ‘I’m not signing it.’ Muenchow has been working on a project with DFO scientists in the Eastern Arctic since 2003.

In 2003, when the collaborative research project began, there were quite different rules about sharing data: ‘Data and any other project-related information shall be freely available to all Parties to this Agreement and may be used, disseminated or published, at any time.’

Within days of February 1st’s new publication policy, on February 7, came another DFO email to scientists: now they must obtain prior consent before applying for research grants.

You can see where this is going. It is not enough to muzzle scientists like Dr Miller when their research is published. The tightening of control over science must be established far earlier in the process. Stop the research from being submitted to journals. Stop the scientists from collaborating with others. Stop scientists from applying for research grants. Stop science from happening at all.

The elimination of whole branches of scientific work within the federal government, the slashing of governmental funds for science, and now a departmental veto on applying for research grants or submitting results to peer reviewed journals fits in the larger systemic dismantling of any aspect of governmental activities that could throw doubt on the wisdom of pressing for rapid expansion of fossil fuel exploitation.

‘Chilling’ is one word, but it does not seem adequate to this development. This is the 21st Century equivalent of the Dark Ages. This is book burning and superstition run rampant. This is the administration of a steady, slow drip of poison to a weakening democracy.

The post Tightening the grip: muzzling of scientists ramps up appeared first on Elizabeth May.

In addition to the evidence in her column of restricted media access to government scientists and the new requirements that scientists who collaborate with them accept terms that require permission from the Canadian government before sharing their findings, recent Fisheries and Oceans Canada rules moved to shut down scientific research before it starts.

On Feb. 7, in a DFO e-mail to scientists, it was stipulated that they obtain prior consent before applying for research grants. As well, before submitting research to a peer-reviewed journal for publication, scientists must obtain permission from a departmental superior (who, no doubt, needs permission from the Prime Minister’s Office).

Search as I might, I can’t find suppression of science and research and the strangling of the free flow of information in the Conservatives’ 2011 platform. No one voted for this.

Elizabeth May, Leader, Green Party of Canada

(Originally printed in the Globe and Mail)

The post Muzzle Velocity appeared first on Elizabeth May.

“We join the Coalition to Save ELA in urging Environment Minister Kent to take immediate action to stop the Department of Fisheries and Oceans from selling the ELA to a private owner,” said Green Party Leader Elizabeth May, MP Saanich-Gulf Islands. “Like the Coalition, we fear such a transfer from public to private hands might be done while Parliament is recessed, and opposition members won’t be in Ottawa to criticize this destructive move.”

The Environmental Lakes Area is Canada’s only whole-lake, freshwater research region capable of providing the scientific information needed to keep the government and Canadians informed about issues facing our increasingly threatened environment. Transferring such a crucial facility to private, for-profit interests could alter the focus of future research and bring results into question. The ownership and use of the data will also be lost to Canadians.

To quote from the Coalition to Save the ELA: “Unless it remains funded by the government and staffed by public service scientists, the research priorities at ELA will cease to reflect public policy priorities or serve the public interest. Furthermore, the disposal of ELA and the dismantling of its science team will significantly reduce the freshwater science expertise and capacity within the Public Service of Canada.”

Tragically, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans claims that research at the ELA is “no longer aligned with its core mandate.” The Green Party joins with the Coalition to Save ELA in asking Minister Kent and Environment Canada (EC) to take the ELA under its wing where it can help EC fulfill its stated priorities.

These include addressing the implications of economic growth, climate change, and other factors on water resources. The ELA has 40 years’ worth of data on the health of and changes to our lakes. Also, EC scientists have been operating floating sampling stations on ELA lakes to integrate air and water monitoring.

“One of the primary roles of the Experimental Lakes Area has been to investigate and mitigate the impacts of Alberta’s oil-sands development on regional water bodies,” said May. “I certainly hope that the Conservatives aren’t abandoning this internationally respected field station because it might embarrass them and their pro-extraction agenda.

“This would be tragic because scientific research and findings are needed to guide public policy in the interests of all Canadians and remain in the public interest. This effective natural laboratory, needed now more than ever, simply must remain a part of the Government of Canada.”

The post Green Party Supports Last-Ditch Efforts to Save Experimental Lakes Area (ELA) appeared first on Elizabeth May.

The communications strategy also attacks environmental groups for having a self-serving agenda, suggesting they are raising awareness about fish farms in order to support their fundraising efforts.  “This allegation against environmental groups is outrageous,” said May. “No one in their right minds would dedicate their lives to stopping the destruction of our oceans just for kicks – these people work incredibly hard and for very little money. That DFO would promote this denigration of citizens is completely inexcusable.”  The strategy goes on to attack journalists as biased and suggests that the public is confused and apathetic.  “It is disgusting that this communications strategy was considered a viable way to proceed,” said May.

The Green party recalls the parroting of DFO talking points against the David Suzuki Foundation and salmon activist Alexandra Morton in a September 2010 Globe and Mail column by Margaret Wente.  “We need to know who promoted this boosterism over regulation, how much was spent to assist the multinational fish farms, and how many journalists received their talking points from DFO. The House Committee on Fisheries should hold emergency hearings into the matter,” said May.
Greens are calling for an overhaul of aquaculture policy in DFO.  “We demand that DFO do its job to protect fisheries and leave pro-industry public relations to the industry. They can afford to do their own PR,” said May.

The post DFO should leave PR to fish farms, say Greens appeared first on Elizabeth May.

“As a nation, we should be terribly concerned about crashing salmon populations and we should have access to the research of our own government scientists that can help us to fix this problem,” said Green Fisheries Critic Janice Harvey.  “The entire convoluted process that government scientists have to jump through to access media is completely ridiculous.”

Kristi Miller leads a salmon genetics project at the federal Pacific Biological Station in Nanaimo, on Vancouver Island, operated by Fisheries and Oceans Canada.  She has been researching possible genetic factors associated with increased death rates of sockeye salmon.  After her research started to gain worldwide attention, the Privy Council Office ordered her not to speak publicly and prevented any interviews by journalists.

“Muzzling Kristi Miller is unfortunately part of a larger pattern of the Harper government silencing scientists from all departments, preventing any information from reaching the public.  Any information that does emerge is carefully screened and scripted by political communications officers in Ottawa,” said May.

Elizabeth May has pledged her support to the Canadian Science Writers’ Association who are working to end the muzzling of Canadian government scientists.

The post Let Scientists Speak appeared first on Elizabeth May.

Seconded by Elizabeth May February 1, 2012

Click here for the complete document.

The post Bill C-225 An Act to amend the Fisheries Act appeared first on Elizabeth May.

“Perhaps the most neglected natural areas on Earth are our marine environments,  for the simple reason that humans live on land and not under water. But  our oceans harbor most life on the planet. The Strait of Georgia in  particular has extremely diverse marine environments harboring  incredible creatures, from the endangered southern resident orcas to  glass sponges in Saanich Inlet to a phenomenal diversity of fish,  invertebrates, birds, and marine mammals throughout the region,” stated  Ms. May. “As the new Member of Parliament representing the region of the proposed Strait of Georgia National Marine Conservation Area, I’m  hoping that the federal and provincial governments will give approval  for the establishment of this first rate marine sanctuary soon. It would be a phenomenal marine complement to the Gulf Islands National Park  Reserve.”

The BC and federal governments signed a Memorandum Of Understanding in 2003 to undertake studies on the scientific and socio-economic feasibility  of creating an NMCA in the waters stretching from the Haro Strait and  Saanich Inlet by Victoria, north to the waters around Gabriola Island  near Nanaimo.

National Marine Conservation Areas (NMCAs) administered by Parks Canada and  Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) administered by the Department of  Fisheries and Oceans, offer protection to marine ecosystems, ranging  from restrictions on certain practices and harvesting of some species to fully-protecting all marine life in “no take” areas. Worldwide,  “no-take” MPAs have dramatically increased the populations and size of  commercial and non-commercial species. This includes increasing the net  amount of commercially available fisheries, as protected fish and  invertebrate populations inside MPA’s grow and spill over into adjacent  areas where they can be harvested. Unfortunately less than 0.01% of  Canada’s and BC’s marine waters are in fully-protected “no-take” areas.

“While BC is still blessed with productive and diverse marine environments,  today’s richness pales in comparison to the abundance of life in years  past. At one time the seas teemed with so many salmon, lingcod,  rockfish, invertebrates, birds, whales, and seals that early European  settlers thought the marine wealth to be inexhaustible. An extensive  network of real marine protection can help our oceans approach their  former biological magnificence, brimming with life to sustain all the  citizens of this country,” stated Ms. May

Parks Canada has a goal of representing each of Canada’s 29 natural marine  regions in a system of National Marine Conservation Areas. Currently  only four NMCA’s have been declared, including one in BC – the Gwaii  Haanas (South Moresby) NMCA and Haida Heritage Site announced last year. NMCA’s prohibit ocean dumping, seabed mining and oil and gas  exploration and development, and can also restrict harvesting of certain species, including zoning some fully-protected “no-take” areas.

“Scientists around the world and in Canada have been calling for the protection of  at least 30% of the oceans in fully-protected ‘no-take’ marine  sanctuaries. I fully support this goal and will push hard as Canada’s  first Green MP to see to it that the glacial pace of marine protection  is stepped-up before our oceans are emptied out,” stated Ms. May. “June 8 is Oceans Day and what better way to celebrate that special day than  with the announcement of a new National Marine Conservation Area in the  Strait of Georgia?”

The post Elizabeth May calls for Approval of the Strait of Georgia National Marine Conservation Area and a Major Expansion of Marine Sanctuaries appeared first on Elizabeth May.