All about Whitewater: 1/22/12

Read About: Money and The Kipawa River, Whitewater Ontario,Les amis de la rivière Kipawa,The Proposed Tabaret River diversion project, Northern Ontario Liquid Adventurers,Canadian Rivers Network The viewpoints and opinions expressed here are those of the author and are not necessarily those of Whitewater Ontario or Les Amis de la Riviere Kipawa. Those groups did not vet these comments and would not likely endorse the views expressed here or the manner in which they have been expressed.

Friday, January 27, 2012

Affidavit accuses Prime Minister's Office of threatening environmental charity Bob Weber, Tuesday, January 24, 2012 7:47 PM Read it on Global News: Global BC | Affidavit accuses Prime Minister's Office of threatening environmental charity

So... somebody is lying.

see article

The testator said: "I think Canadians need to know that behind the scenes, the Prime Minister's Office has apparently attempted to silence a legitimate voice and a critic of the proposed Enbridge oil tanker and pipeline project," he said.

Sources:

Affidavit accuses Prime Minister’s Office of threatening environmental charity http://www.globaltvbc.com/canada/affidavit+accuses+prime+ministers+office+of+threatening+environmental+charity/6442566233/story.html

Environmentalist’s departure sheds light on tension felt by green groups http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/activists-dismissal-raises-the-temperature-in-pipeline-debate/article2313991/

Attack on “radicals” sign of tougher federal strategy http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2012/01/11/pol-gateway-pipeline-strategy.html

Feds list First Nations, green groups as oilsands “adversaries” http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Feds+list+First+Nations+green+groups+oilsands+adversaries/6054920/story.html
”Scary time” for Canada http://www.vancouverobserver.com/sustainability/2012/01/25/scary-time-canada

Canadian pipeline needs aboriginal consent: chief http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/25/us-aboriginals-idUSTRE80O1SC20120125

Save the Fraser Declaration http://savethefraser.ca
Whistleblower’s Open Letter to Canadians http://www.scribd.com/doc/79228736/Whistleblower-s-Open-Letter-to-Canadians

PMO branded environmental group an ‘enemy’ of Canada, affidavit says http://www.thestar.com/news/article/1120800--pmo-branded-environmental-group-an-enemy-of-canada-affidavit-says

Affidavit accuses Prime Minister's Office of threatening environmental charity http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/arts-and-life/life/greenpage/affidavit-accuses-prime-ministers-office-of-threatening-environmental-charity-137994418.html

Affidavit accuses PMO of threatening environmental group http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Canada/20120124/pmo-affidavit-environment-120124/

Thursday, January 26, 2012

Nicole Foss: Q&A Food for thought

The Costa Concordia: Is this the metaphor and portent for things to come in 2012

A large ship, seemingling unstoppable, capital intensive, multinational in scope, about to keel over, and notice the life boats heading for "who knows where".

IS SHALE GAS THE ANSWER TO OUR ENERGY NEEDS?

Jeff Rubin, (author of the book "why your world is about to get a whole lot smaller" in this interview
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/video/is-shale-gas-a-game-changer/article1868254/

in the Globe and Mail says not: depletion rates are too high and well head costs are too high relative to the current low price of gas.
Also consider this comment from

Juan Peron

12:22 PM on January 13, 2011

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Juan Peron. Show DetailsHide Details

Shale oil is extracted through hydraulic fracturing (fracking). The process pumps water and chemicals into the ground at a pressurized rate exceeding what the bedrock can withstand, resulting in a microquake that produces rock fractures.

According to an article by Rady Ananda, fracking has been used in Arkansas for some time with a tremendous increase in earthquake frequency following advanced drilling. There were thirty-eight earthquakes in Arkansas in 2009, and more in 2010 than in all of the twentieth century. There has been a 1,200% increase in earthquakes over 2009 in the last four months of 2010.

The recent, well-publicized deaths of thousands of birds happened in the shale extraction area of Arkansa. An earthquake of whatever scale can release a stream or cloud of gas and fracking chemicals which could easily explain why sleeping birds would suddenly take flight, and then quickly die as they succumbed to the toxic fumes. Hundreds of thousands of dead fish along the Arkansas River likely died from the same cause.

Dead fish, dead birds, and earthquakes. Are these the disasters that we are bringing to Canada?

The evidence we see today is the sudden drop in price of CARBO CERAMICS, the primary producer of fracking materials/propants.

By comparison, take a look at Westport Innovations, makers of natural gas powered engines:

By this logic, Wesport would go to the moon, if only gas prices would go to zero.

Of course, if the argument in favour of Shale Gas and Wesport had nothing to do with making money and EVERYTHING to do with building resliency in the economy then this all makes sense.

The question is what does the participation of the MIC and other related government agencies look like? If it is high, then it is reasonable to assume these companies will continue to grow.

Wednesday, January 25, 2012

Raging Grannies take on updating the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act

Inky Dinky Parlez-vous?

Raging Grannies sing the CEAA Blues from MiningWatch on Vimeo.

for more details: see the Canadian Environmental Network site... while it still exists!

http://rcen.ca/action-alerts/action-alert-canada-s-environmental-assessment-law-is-under-attack

for the full newsrelease; see below
Online, complete with Raging Grannies video, at:
http://rcen.ca/action-alerts/action-alert-canada-s-environmental-assessment-law-is-under-attack

Action Alert: Canada’s Environmental Assessment Law Is Under Attack

January, 2012

The Harper Government wants to gut the Canadian Environmental Assessment
Act.

Tell the Conservatives that Canada’s environment matters – and
environmental laws matter.

Tell Prime Minister Harper, Environment Minister Kent, and Natural
Resources Minister Oliver we won’t accept shoddy “streamlined” public
reviews and destructive megaprojects – even if they change the law to
allow them to proceed.

Background

The Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA) is one of the most
important pieces of environmental legislation in Canada. It often
provides for more public participation and a more rigorous review than
provincial assessment legislation, and in many cases covers projects not
subject to provincial assessment at all. The Act has been in place since
1995.

CEAA was intended to promote sustainable development by forcing federal
authorities to make sure that an environmental assessment was done on
any projects they were required to authorise. It worked, but it did have
a number of problems that environmental groups, aboriginal
organisations, and government agencies have tried to resolve over the
years. Many of the problems have been resolved. For example,
harmonization agreements between federal and provincial governments
allow them to undertake joint reviews that meet both their requirements,
while reducing duplication and confusion for proponents and the public.

Other problems have never been resolved; for example, the Act is centred
on assessing the environmental impacts of physical projects, so
government policies, plans, and programs are not included – things like
fisheries policies, regional development plans, or plans for disposing
of high-level nuclear fuel waste. The review process also suffered
resistance from some government departments, such as Fisheries and
Oceans, that didn’t want to take responsibility for larger environmental
issues. MiningWatch Canada had to go all the way to the Supreme Court to
ensure that assessments could not be artificially defined to limit their
scope and avoid the Act’s public involvement requirements. And it
suffered periodic setbacks, especially when the Navigable Waters
Protection Act was amended in 2009 to exclude it from CEAA, and CEAA
itself amended in 2010 to exclude projects funded under the government’s
Economic Action Plan from environmental assessment.

The Environmental Planning and Assessment Caucus of the Canadian
Environment Network has continued working hard to engage the public and
develop thoughtful, evidence-based proposals for a better federal EA
process, and has produced a significant body of research and documentation.

CEAA Under Review

The Act includes a requirement for Parliament to review it by June 2010.
However, the government did no public preparation for the review and the
House of Commons Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable
Development only started working on it in October, 2011. The Committee
held a scant five weeks of public hearings – nine sessions of less than
two hours each, with witnesses allowed all of ten minutes to make their
initial presentations, and only two days’ notice of the final deadline
for written submissions. The Committee has not yet published its report.

This is a stark contrast with the previous review of the Act, which
included extensive public consultations, government discussion papers,
and thorough public discussions in the Standing Committee.

Meanwhile, Stephen Harper, Peter Kent, and Joe Oliver have all made
public pronouncements about the environmental assessment process taking
too long, creating uncertainty for investors, and threatening economic
development. It is clear from their statements as well as from industry
talking points – and a leaked government document – that the government
is eager to reduce the scope and effectiveness of the federal
environmental assessment process if it can’t eliminate it altogether.
Small projects would be no longer be screened, and the assessment of
large projects will be “delegated” – no longer handled by the Canadian
Environmental Assessment Agency. Some are already handled (badly) by the
National Energy Board and the Nuclear Safety Commission, and this could
be extended to other federal and even provincial agencies, resulting in
an inconsistent patchwork of reviews, incomprehensible to the public –
and ineffective in protecting the public interest – the environment and
people’s livelihoods.

What You Can Do

Please write to Environment Minister Peter Kent to express your concerns
about the federal government’s intention to weaken federal environmental
assessment laws and undermine sustainable development in Canada. Send
copies to Prime Minister Harper, Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver,
and the opposition parties’ environment critics, as well as your own
Member of Parliament. Engage your MP in discussion on this issue as most
of them know little about it and don’t realise its importance.

Most importantly, talk to your neighbours, friends, even strangers.
People have put a lot of hard work into trying to create and
environmental assessment process that protects the environment from
inappropriate development projects and gives the public a say in
development. We will not accept a review process that is “streamlined”
to limit public participation and ensure that potentially destructive
megaprojects proceed without serious consideration of their impacts –
and without those safeguards in place we will not accept the projects
themselves.

The following is a draft letter that you can send to Environment
Minister Peter Kent.
• If you can, personalize your message by adding information about your
own specific concerns. This could relate to a particular type of
development projects, a particular environmental assessment, or other
sustainable development issues.
• Make sure to send a copy to your own Member of Parliament.
• Below the letter, you will find a list of the relevant addresses,
phone/fax numbers, and e-mails.

Dear Minister Kent,

Don’t trash the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act! This law is
critical to understanding and mitigating the adverse environmental
effects of developments such as pipelines, tar sands projects, and
mines. Eliminating legal requirements and limiting public participation
in project reviews makes environmental disasters such as BP’s Deepwater
Horizon, Exxon Valdez, and Fukushima more likely. I know that you don’t
want catastrophes like these to happen in Canada.

That’s why I am urging you to work with Parliament to strengthen the
Canadian Environmental Assessment Act to make it more effective,
efficient, and open to public participation.

Canadians want all development projects to be sustainable, and a
stronger environmental assessment law – not a weaker one – is key to
achieving that goal.

Thank you for considering my views.

Sincerely,

[your name here]

cc: The Right Hon. Stephen Harper, Prime Minister of Canada
The Hon. Joe Oliver, Minister of Natural Resources
Megan Leslie, MP, NDP Environment Critic
Kirsty Duncan, MP, Liberal Environment Critic
Maria Mourani, MP, Bloc Québecois Environment Critic
Elizabeth May, Leader of the Green Party

To find your Member of Parliament, use the Parliamentary directory at
http://www.parl.gc.ca/SenatorsMembers.aspx?Language=E.

Mail may be sent postage-free to any Member of Parliament at the
following address:
House of Commons
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0A6

The Honourable Peter Kent
Minister of the Environment
Tel. (613) 992-0253
Fax: (613) 992-0887
Peter.Kent@parl.gc.ca

The Right Hon. Stephen Harper
Prime Minister of Canada
Tel. (613) 992-4211
Fax: (613) 941-6900
Stephen.Harper@parl.gc.ca

The Honourable Joe Oliver
Minister of Natural Resources
Tel. (613) 992-6361
Fax: (613) 992-9791
Joe.Oliver@parl.gc.ca

Megan Leslie
Tel. (613) 995-7614
Fax: (613) 992-8569
Megan.Leslie@parl.gc.ca

Kirsty Duncan
Tel. (613) 995-4702
Fax: (613) 995-8359
Kirsty.Duncan@parl.gc.ca

Maria Mourani
Tel. (613) 992-0983
Fax: (613) 992-1932
Maria.Mourani@parl.gc.ca

Elizabeth May
Tel. (613) 996-1119
Fax: (613) 996-0850
Elizabeth.May@parl.gc.ca

--
Jamie Kneen, Communications & Outreach Coordinator, MiningWatch Canada
http://www.miningwatch.ca/

Tuesday, January 24, 2012

BANK HOLIDAY? Biden praises Corzine - its all so wrong

Monday, January 23, 2012

GUNS, GOLD, and a GETAWAY PLAN : Okay - Where would you run to?

Gonzola Lira, born and raised under the Pinochet dictatorship in Chile has recently said that media censorship in the US is more profound that it was in Chile under Pinochet.

The question raised was: well? where do you run?

There are very few options:

According to this article from CBC, the world can be a very unsafe place.

The information comes from the government of Canada's External Affairs own site:

Interesting the home of the brave and land of the free, the USA shows up as a vibrant green zone, just as long as your name isn't Mahar Arar ( who was kidnapped by the US government, and sent to Syria for torture. Oh yes, and there is still that pesky Guantanamo Bay prison in Cuba. Private Manning is still being held in detention after a year, with out charge or arrest after releasing informaiton to Wikileaks. And so on...

Foreign Affairs, offers this advice about entering the USA:
Your rights when entering the U.S.

Under U.S. law, foreign nationals do not have the same rights as American citizens. When attempting to enter the U.S. (border crossing or airport) and while a determination is being made by U.S. authorities on your admissibility, you could be held for an extended period of time. If you are deemed inadmissible, there may be delays before you are returned to your point of departure or country of nationality.

So much is happening in the USA in the name of "national security interests" it is wise to pause and consider the implications on travel in general.

See John Pilger's Film "War on Democracy"

at 1:05:38 "National Security Interests... Like it or Lump it"

Daniel Clarridge former CIA director tells it like it is:

A truly frightening admonition.

Foreign Affairs doesn't offer any opinion on Canada but in my estimation, Canada still has rule of law, even though a majority government is essentially a dictatorship. The fusion of Corporate power and Government is reasonably obvious especially as the environmental issues around the tar sands and the Northern Pipeline become known. Fascism is growing but Canadians know it as something else, more benign, like "corporate sponsorship" or "lobbying", so much more comforting.

But the answers are not exactly clear. Gonzola's own site seeks to counsel people on their own relocation - for a nominal fee.

I'm thinking Canada is still a good bet: too bad about the weather ( six months of the year) but its much better in Ottawa than it is in Winnipeg, and the summer has no mosquitos to speak of.

There is, of course, one tiny problem and a roadmap of the country will pretty much spell it out:

The network of fourway, high capacity highways leading to Canada from the the United States is very significant. In many cases, the roads up from the US are 4 lane and the roads into Canada are 2 lane.

So despite our complacency about living in Canada once the "shit hits the fan" we may find we have a lot of new neighbors we didn't count on.

Whitewater Ontario - Mission Statement

It is Whitewater Ontario’s mission to support the whitewater paddling community through the promotion, development and growth of the sport in its various disciplines. We accomplish this through the development of events, resources, clubs, and programs for personal and athletic development, regardless of skill level or focus, to ensure a high standard of safety and competency; We advocate safe and environmentally responsible access and use of Ontario’s rivers. Whitewater Ontario is the sport governing body in the province, and represents provincial interests within the national body Whitewater Canada and the Canadian Canoe Association http://www.whitewaterontario.ca/page/mission.asp

Tabaret is a Bad Idea

About the Kipawa

The best thing paddlers can do to help the cause of the Kipawa:

1. attend the rally and bring others including non paddlers to attend and buy beer and have fun

2. write your MP /MNA and raise the issue and post your objections -1 letter = 200 who didn't write

3. Write Thierry Vandal the CEO of Hydro Quebec strongly opposing the 132 MW standard decrying the use of "diversion" as the most environmentally inappropriate method of power production

4. Write Jean Charest, Premier of Quebec protesting that either the algonquin or the tabaret project will eliminate all other values on the Kipawa River by turning it into a dry gulch.

5. See if you can get other allied groups interested by showing your own interest, ie the Sierra Defense Fund, Earthwild, MEC, and so on.

6. Demand further consultation

7. Currently we are at the point where we need to sway public opinion and raise awareness.

However, if all else fails, don't get mad, simply disrupt, foment, and protest . The Monkey Wrench Gang.

Have you read Edward Abbey?

Important Addresses
CEO,Hydro Québec, 75 boul René Levesque, Montreal, P.Q., H2Z 1A4Caille.andre@hydro.qc.ca

Tabaret is a Bad Idea (Part Two)

Les Amis de la Riviere Kipawa is poised to use an application to the Federal Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus to ensure the Minster does what he is supposed to do, protect the public's right to navigate the water control structure at Laniel, Quebec using the Navigable Waters Protection Act. (see http://www.kipawariver.ca/)

In the now gutted Navigable Waters Protection Act lay the means by which the Minister of Transport could keep the public right of passage down our great Canadian Heritage, our rivers and streams which are threatened especially by resource corporations and power brokers such as Hydro Quebec.

These powerful entities continue to petition that 'this' river or 'that' stream is not navigable and therefore not protectable.
I don't say that dams and bridges should not be built, only that if they are, historical navigation rights should be considered and preserved by making reasonable accommodations for recreational boaters.

It is the Minister of Transport, in exercising the right to allow or disallow work on or over a navigable waterway is what keeps boats and recreational boaters plying our waterways.

To many recent cases launched in the Federal Court concerning the Navigable Waters Protection Act, most recently the case of the Humber Environment Group of Cornerbrook Newfoundland versus the Cornerbrook Pulp and Paper Company indicates that the important oversight is not being faithfully performed. Have we really come to the point now where we must say "such and such a stream is one foot deep, possessing so many cubic feet per second flow and so on?" The answer to this is... YES!

The honourable Mr. Justice John A. O'Keefe, ruled that it had not been shown that the river was navigable. How convenient was that to the Minister? But either the Minister of Transport acts to protect our rivers and streams as a public right or he does not and that means rivers and streams currently enjoyed by kayakers and canoists.

Enough of the cheating, and double-talk. Canadians! our rivers and streams are our own, lets urge the Minister of Transport and the our government to protect them.

Peter Karwacki

Tabaret is a Bad Idea (Part Three)

10 Reasons WhyTabaret is a Bad Idea1) Tabaret is too big. The station is designed to useevery drop of water available in the Kipawawatershed, but will run at only 44 percent capacity.We believe the Tabaret station is designed to usewater diverted from the Dumoine River into theKipawa watershed in the future. 2) The Tabaret project will eliminate the aquaticecosystem of the Kipawa River.The Tabaret project plan involves the diversion of a16-km section of the Kipawa River from its naturalstreambed into a new man-made outflow from LakeKipawa. 3) Tabaret will leave a large industrial footprint on thelandscape that will impact existing tourismoperations and eliminate future tourism potential. 4) The Tabaret project is an aggressive single-purposedevelopment, designed to maximize powergeneration at the expense of all other uses. 5) River-diversion, such as the Tabaret project, takinglarge amounts of water out of a river’s naturalstreambed and moving it to another place, is verydestructive to the natural environment. 6) The Kipawa River has been designated a protectedgreenspace in the region with severe limitations ondevelopment. This designation recognizes theecological, historical and natural heritage value ofthe river and the importance of protecting it.Tabaret will eliminate that value. 7) If necessary, there are other, smarter and morereasonable options for producing hydro power onthe Kipawa watershed. It is possible to build a lowimpactgenerating station on the Kipawa river, andmanage it as a “run-of-the-river” station, makinguse of natural flows while maintaining other values,with minimal impact on the environment. 8) The Kipawa watershed is a rich natural resource forthe Temiscaming Region, resonably close to largeurban areas, with huge untapped potential fortourism and recreation development in the future.Tabaret will severely reduce this potential. 9) Tabaret provides zero long-term economic benefitfor the region through employment. The plan is forthe station to be completely automated andremotely operated. 10) The Kipawa River is 12,000 years old. The riverwas here thousands of years before any peoplecame to the region. The Tabaret project will change all that.

Problems on a local River?

There is more to do as well but you have to do your research and above all, don't give up.
IN the meantime prepared a document itemizing the history of navigation of this spot and its recreational value. Use the Kipawa river history of navigation as a guide: see www.kipawariver.ca
Under the Ministry of Environment guidelines you have a set period of time to petition the change under the environmental bill of rights, you may have limited time to take this action. But it involves going to court for a judicial review of the decision.
4. contact the ministry of natural resources officials and do the same thing.
3. contact the ministry of the environment and determine if they approved the project
2. determine if the dam was a legal dam, approved under the navigable waters protection act.
1. research the decision and timing of it to determine if an environmental assessment was done.

Kipawa River Issues

What was at stake - what happened :

The Court did not accept that the public right of navigation is a paramount right and that property owners should not exercise their rights in such a way as to interfere with the rights of navigation wherever possible;

The Court did not accept the de facto history and uncontradicted evidence that the old dam did not completely obstruct navigation by canoe, raft and kayak
and it is technically impossible to have a structure that serves the object of flood control but doesn't deny navigation;

The Court disagreed that negatively impacting marine navigation is a significant environmental effect
and the Court disagreed that CEAA requires that the government apply precautionary principles to development so as to minimize or avoid significant environmental effects such as the loss of marine navigation;

and

the Court disagreed that PWGSC started with the incorrect and immutable starting assumption that navigation is unsafe and illegal and that holding such a position caused it to be hostile to a stakeholder and minimize a stakeholder's views from the outset, that is in direct conflict with its statutory obligations and duties.

It was ruled by virture of the court decision that PWGSC started with correct assumptions from the very outset thereby causing it to view Les Amis as a mere nuisance and rendering the process a farce where only one conclusion was possible.

The Court agreed there was a public consultation in the sense of dialogue or exchange, through a series of decrees or edicts.

What PWGSC says was a consultation, Les Amis says was a sham and a farce.

The Court agreed with PWGSC.

How to become an Environmental Activist

How to be an Activist

There is no formal school for activists. No university degree qualifies the graduate to practice grassroots organizing. Environmental activists, like many other practitioners of social change, come in all shapes and sizes, from all walks of life, and even from all political parties. And all of us learn from experience. On the other hand, we should be able to benefit from the experience of others. Unfortunately, more often than not, people suddenly find themselves in a situation that requires a certain moral heroism. They had not planned to become activists. Environmental problems themselves create activists. When a toxic landfill threatens the neighborhood, local lawyers may volunteer to do some legal work, scientists may offer volunteer help and the community of concerned parents suddenly find themselves wondering how to write a press release, circulate petitions, and, even conduct a sit-in in a politician’s office. By the time they are in the thick of a campaign, it is hard to know where to turn for help and advice. The reality of ordinary people picking up the gauntlet and becoming politically active is largely unknown to the as-yet uninitiated public. By the time the small neighbourhood citizens group gets its issue before the public, its members are already being labeled as “environmentalists”. From that point on, their true identity is lost as surely as Clark Kent’s when he emerges as Superman.

The media labeling process does society a disservice. It cuts off “activists” and “environmentalists” from “normal” people. The general public, as demonstrated by numerous polls, supports the principles of environmental protection and restoration, but usually they believe it is for some other category of people, called “environmentalists”, to do the work they support.

When an environmental group is described as a “special interest” group, there is a blurring between those who protect “special” interests, usually of a financial nature, and those who work on a volunteer basis, usually at personal sacrifice and expense, to pursue a cause in the public good. The reality of activism, for the environment or any other cause, is that democracy is at work. Citizens are exercising democratic rights. Rather than being the exception to the rule, for democracy to thrive, all citizens should be activists.

A Few Good Starting Points Recognizing that environmental activism is a democratic right, it is important to have a few good starting points to encourage the neophyte.
Refuse to be intimidated.
If you are told that a subject is too technical or scientific for you to understand, don’t believe it. Elected politicians make these decisions all the time based on general knowledge and their sense of public opinion. The claim of “expert” versus average concerned citizen is inherently anti- democratic and elitist. You may not be an expert. But you can read and understand what experts have to say.
Make a note of good quotes (including the source) of expert views concerned with the environment.
Start your own card file of references to unleash if someone tries to suggest you don’t know enough to be involved.
Be creative!
Every campaign and issue has its own dynamic. Let your creative juices flow. Maybe satire will work for you. Maybe song. Even conventional campaigns can attract more people if you have an optimistic, innovative approach. Don’t take no for an answer.
If you want to meet an elected official, call every day. Drop by the office and get to know the staff. Be persistent.The squeaky wheel.
Ask lots of questions. Get to the bottom of issues. Do your homework. Use the telephone. It is a great research tool. Ten times better than writing and asking for information is phoning until you find the person who knows the answer and will immediately send you information. In addition to getting what you want, you may have uncovered a good source for future information - and maybe even an ally in the bureaucracy.
Be unfailingly polite. Being persistent is not the same thing as being rude. You may be in this for the long haul, so don’t burn any bridges.

Leave no stone unturned. Think about who knows who. How can you expand your network? Your allies may come from unexpected places, so do not make assumptions. Ask people for help.
When someone in government does something good for the environment, be sure to give public credit and thanks. You can accomplish anything, if you don’t care who gets the credit. Remember that politics is also personal.
Watch out for burn- out. You’ll need the support of friends and family. Build love into your campaigns. Some Starting Points In local organizing, one of the first things you’ll probably want to do is form a group.
Don’t re-invent the wheel. Look around. Is there an existing group, with goals similar to your own, that would accept your group as a working committee, or affiliated chapter? If you can avoid going through the incorporation process and the charitable number ordeal by joining an existing group (and co-opting them to your issue in the process), why not try? If you are organizing your own group, try not to get bogged down in by-laws.

Stick to the essentials. If you want to change a decision at City Council in three months, you won’t have time for Robert’s Rules of Order. In order not to lose momentum, and volunteers, make the meetings fun by including some social activity.
Plan a pot luck supper first and then work through the agenda efficiently. Folk singer and environmental activist Pete Seeger organized a very successful campaign to clean up the Hudson River. He advised,

“Don’t have meetings that only attract the kind of people who like going to meetings.” Be sure to assign tasks as you make decisions. If someone suggests something new, don’t reject it just because everyone who is heavily involved is already too busy. Say “What a great idea! Will you take that on?”
Delegate! Pick achievable goals. Positive reinforcement is important. So deciding to make your goal “achieving world peace” or “ending hunger” will likely result in burn-out and disillusionment. On the other hand, making your goal to get 10,000 names on a petition to do either of the above is do-able and will have a positive reinforcing impact - you’ll gain strength and enthusiasm for the next goal. How to get your message in the news media

It is a fact of life that environmental groups don’t have money. Some projects may qualify for government grants, but they are usually the “safe” kind. Planting trees. Picking up litter. While such projects are undoubtedly worthwhile, they are not going to change the world. Trying to reduce dependency on environmentally damaging and non-sustainable energy sources (like fossil fuels, large scale hydro and nuclear power) fundamentally challenges the status quo. So does trying to end the use of toxic pesticides for cosmetic purposes. If you are working on issues like these, it is hard to obtain the kind of money it takes to gain public (and political) attention through advertising. The mainstay of your information and awareness campaign is going to be the news media. Hence, the environmental movement and the news media have an awkward and symbiotic relationship: they need us for stories, and the environmental movement certainly needs them. But environmentalists get frustrated with the superficiality of news coverage of issues that threaten planetary survival, and the news media get sick of hearing what they often regard as predictable whining from the greens. So how can you, with little or no media experience, be expected to break through to reasonably accurate coverage of your concerns? First, you should understand a few things about the news media.. Noam Chomsky’s analysis (“Manufacturing Consent”) notwithstanding, you can get your issue in the public eye. It helps if you are able to see the story from the reporter’s point of view. There are very few newspapers or electronic networks with a full time environmental reporter. You are trying to get a reporter, who has to cover everything from tax hikes to crime on the street, interested in your story. There are no Woodwards and Bernsteins. Calling and telling them there’s a big story out there if they do some really good investigative reporting will get your message consigned to the waste basket, (or, in an environmentally aware newsroom, the recycling bin.) If you want a reporter to cover your story, you have to do all their work for them. Think it through. Where’s the angle? “A local group of environmentalists are organizing to save the environment” is hardly an earth shattering story. Remember the old adage, “Dog bites man” is not a story. “Man bites dog” is.
Tie your issue to other political events, like elections or previous campaign promises. What are the financial issues? Is taxpayers’ money being wasted? Are jobs being lost? Are the environmental alternatives better for the economy? (They usually are.) Make it interesting to someone who doesn’t give a hydro-electric dam. Fill in the “5 W’s” : Who, What, When, Where and Why. Make sure all your facts are absolutely accurate. Write your own press release. It should read like a news story, not like your group’s manifesto. Put in quotes from group representatives. Be sure to include phone numbers so that reporters can call you to get more details and re-work your press release into their own story.
SAMPLE PRESS RELEASE
PRESS RELEASE (Your logo appears here) Group’s mailing address Headline in Boldface Appears at Top DATE: Put the date on which you want the story to be released, or put the words "For immediate release:" at the beginning of your release. TEXT: The first sentence should be clear, factual and grab the attention of the reader. It should tell the press what the story is about. TEXT EXAMPLE: (City): Citizens Organized to Save Wetlands today announced the results of their audit of the costs of the proposed Department of Boondoggles development. “By our calculations, reviewed by the firm of Somebody Credible Ltd., the Department of Boondoggles will be increasing the provincial deficit by $300 million by choosing this environmentally sensitive site, instead of merely recycling their existing building,” said group chair, J. Q. Public. Citizens Organized to Save Wetlands are considering legal action if their current petition campaign is unsuccessful in persuading the Department to re-consider its plans. They are also planning a demonstration in front of Department headquarters to take place next Wednesday, the xth of xx, at 12 noon. “We are confident that good sense will prevail,” said group researcher I. M. Green, “With the provincial election in the offing, and so many environmentally concerned statements coming from the Premier’s Office, we simply cannot believe that this deliberately wrong-headed policy will prevail. - 30 - (It is a convention of news releases that they end with “- 30 -”. It tells reporters that the text has ended.) Contact information: (Don’t forget to include the name and phone number where people quoted in the release can be reached for comment.) Send your release to ensure it reaches the media before or on your release date. If you are far from a media centre, you can fax your release, or phone it in to the closest office of the Canadian Press (CP). CP is a wire service. If it puts your story on their service, it will automatically reach television, radio and newspaper newsrooms. It is then the decision of the news director in each outlet whether to use your story. I used to send releases from a town of 45 people in Cape Breton Island down to CP in Halifax, phoning it in right before I went to sleep to get low phone rates. I can remember how astonishing it was to wake up in the morning and hear my release on the radio. Beyond press releases, you may want to hold a press conference. Don’t do it unless you have a really good story, or can bring in an acknowledged expert who won’t be available as a matter of course. Hold press conferences somewhere familiar to the media. Make it convenient. Try to avoid having to spend money to rent space. Is there a good community centre close to the downtown? Can you get the help of someone in City Council to use City Hall or the Regional Government Centre? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A SHOPPING LIST OF CAMPAIGN TACTICS
The following are tried and true. It is a good idea to try something fairly straightforward initially, with minimum risk of failure. 1) Letter writing campaigns Politicians really do pay attention to their mail! Especially the volume of mail. As letters mount up on an issue, it will achieve greater importance. At the national level, one letter is considered to represent thousands of people’s opinions. The ratio declines as you move down the government hierarchy, but at the municipal level, fewer people write, so the letters still have clout. Your letter does not have to be typed. Handwriting is fine. So is word processing.
The key is that your letter is original and not recognizable as a pre-printed message.
ALWAYS SIGN YOUR LETTERS.
Include your address for their response. Your letter does not have to be technical. You do not have to know everything about an issue to write and express your opinion. It does have to be clear. State explicitly what you want the politician to do. Include a specific question requesting his or her response. If the response misses the point or is inadequate, write again. Remember, at the level of federal and provincial ministers, a staff person in the bureaucracy writes the response. The minister may not even see your letter. Why persist? Because as the number of letters add up, the issue is given greater importance. Sometimes you are even able to educate the bureaucracy, or alert the minister to the fact that the staff has him or her signing inaccurate letters. (My brother in Nova Scotia actually called a Minister at home once to say that he didn’t want to attack the Minister in the press over a particularly lame response to a letter. He gave the Minister a chance by asking him if he knew that the letter prepared by his bureaucrats included misleading information. The Minister didn’t know and was grateful for the call.)

2) Letters to the Editor Did you know that the letters section is the most read section of any newspaper? Not only do people in your community read the letters, government officials have clipping services that reprint the ones dealing with their area. The federal minister of the environment sees clippings from coast to coast, including letters to the editor, every day. Letters should be short, direct and well written. Of course, they should be accurate and educate readers about your issue. Watch for opportunities to respond to articles that have been in the paper.
3) Call-in radio & tv shows There are opportunities for free access to the airwaves. Listen to a show a few times before you call in. Get a sense of the host so you won’t be surprised if they disagree with you. It is easy, anonymous and can get your message to lots of people.
4) Petition campaigns The U.S. Declaration of Independence was sort-of a petition. Less than fifty people signed it and the rest is history. Petitions are an excellent first step for new groups. They are tools for public education. The preamble should set out clearly what the issue is and all the reasons for your concern. (Remember the “WHEREAS’s!) They also force you to know clearly what you want from the government. If you want the municipal council to ban pesticide spraying on all public and private lands, say so. If you want them to maintain a handful of pesticide-free parks, say so. But don’t leave a petition hanging with just a general, “we are against pesticides” statement. Petitions can be circulated door to door, left with sympathetic local merchants, or you can set up a table in the local mall (although this usually has to be arranged fairly far ahead.) If you are trying to solicit support in a public venue like a mall, don’t be shy! Smile and ask people as they come by if they are interested in the environment. If they avert their eyes and walk away, so be it. Leave them alone and KEEP SMILING!
Set a goal.
Know when you are done and make a big deal out of presenting the petition.
Get a sympathetic politician to accept it from you and alert the media.
5) Fundraising Wait a minute. Isn’t this a shopping list of campaign tools? Well, yes. But good grassroots fundraising is not only a way of raising money, it is a way of raising awareness. (And it also deals with that unspoken question of the uninitiated public, “where do those people get their donations?”) Grassroots fundraising should involve lots of people as volunteers. Try to get local donations of supplies, advertising, prizes or whatever from local merchants (and of course give them public credit and thanks). What kinds of things are grassroots fundraisers? Here’s a sample list. But it’s not exhaustive. You can build on these ideas, but better still, come up with your own. Potluck suppers with an entrance fee. Fun. Great food. Cheap and you’ll have something for the campaign pot when the dishes are done. Bake sales. You can get lots of people involved. Hold it at the local mall, or after church. Raffles. Go for donated prizes or make your own. In Cape Breton we raised thousands of dollars with quilt raffles to stop the spraying of 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T. Hold a community fair! Have clowns. Kids’ events. Sell baked goods, homegrown organic veggies, preserves, handcrafts. Include an auction. Ask a local bar if you can have an evening of entertainment for a cause. This will appeal to lots of young people. Musicians are notoriously generous in their support of environmental causes. God bless them. Hold an auction. It could be an art auction. Or hold a flea market of odd junk items. Donate services — a deluxe brunch in someone’s home, or catered to your place, a sailboat outing, babysitting, carpentry, barter for cash for the cause! Hold a massive yard sale. Recycle all your stuff and raise funds. Sometimes in our community environmental struggles in Cape Breton, I was convinced we just kept selling our old plates and hand-me-downs to each other. But it worked. Hold a church supper. Church halls can be rented for not too much, and they are perfect. Big kitchens, well equipped for a crowd and they feel great for community events. Order t-shirts or mugs with your message. Sell them at all your events. You can order great posters from a lot of environmental groups, as well as calendars, t-shirts, postcards and other merchandise. Contact Sierra Club or Western Canada Wilderness for great items. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- How to lobby Whether you’re working to change a policy at City Hall or the federal cabinet, you’ll probably want to sit down and meet with a few of the people who’ll be making that decision. The approach is the same, regardless of how elevated the politician or bureaucrat is. (and, yes, you do have to lobby bureaucrats). As recommended in the “Starting Points” at the beginning of this document: Be unfailingly polite, persistent, network, leave no stone unturned. Experienced fundraisers say you can reach anyone in the world with only two phone calls. Considering that a radio station in Montreal got through to the Queen of England, who can doubt this is true?! So remember, you may not know the Minister or Mayor now, but there is no reason you can’t get to know them. Don’t be intimidated. Once you have a thorough knowledge of your issue and have done your homework, there’s no reason you can’t go to meet key people and put forward your case in person. Preparing for the meeting It is an excellent idea to reduce your key points to a one-page document you can leave with the decision-maker. It’s always easier to write a long document than a short concise one, but the effort to boil down your case is well worth it. Busy people (and the more powerful they are, the busier they are) will never read more than a page. Think through ahead of time what it is you want the decision-maker to do. I know of environmentalists who’ve gone to see very powerful politicians, laid out their case, and prepared for questions on the merits of their argument, only to be completely unprepared for the person agreeing with them and asking the obvious question: “What do you want me to do about this?” If the person you’re seeing is in Cabinet, for example, but not the Minister who actually makes the decision, think through exactly what you want. What is the most strategic thing this person can do to advance your case? Is it to speak quietly to someone, to issue a public statement or to introduce you to someone else so you can explain the issue to them? Your one page note should end with a very specific request. You should also prepare for the personal side of the visit. If nothing else, you will have advanced your cause if the politician is left with a favourable impression - if you’ve started the process of building a relationship. So, do a little research about the person you’ll be meeting. When was she elected to government? Where did he go to university? If hunting and fishing are known to be favourite past-times, build on that to create environmental awareness. Ideally, you’ll find you know someone in common, or that you’ve gone to the same school, or that she was in school with your dad. Be especially sure to research any previous good deeds for the environment. The best way to start any meeting is to thank the politician for something they accomplished in the past. Even if it was twenty years ago, they’ll feel great to know someone still remembers. And you’ll have them remembering that these issues are (or were) important to them. Don’t ignore the small talk. It may be the best part of your meeting. If you are going as part of a group, think through how many of you should go. As a general rule, it is a poor idea to have more than three or four people go in to meet with politicians. It is increasingly intimidating for them, and unwieldy as the meeting size grows.
Be strategic.
If possible do not go to a meeting in a group larger than two or three. Be sure to tell the scheduling person you are dealing with the size of your delegation and the names of the people coming with you. Plan ahead who will cover which points. The Meeting Dressing for the meeting is unfortunately something that should be mentioned. Although there is no question that your value as an individual has nothing to do with how you look, you’ll be more likely to reach a decision-maker if you are dressed in a way to which they are accustomed. Business suits go over better than jeans and sandals. I only wear make-up for media and lobbying. I call it war paint. (As my sister-in-law says, “A girl’s gotta do, what a girl’s gotta do.”) If you haven’t had time to research this person’s background, you can still look for clues around their office. Diplomas, photos, plaques. Find some way to have a more personal chat at some point in the meeting. Most people love talking about themselves. It puts them at ease. A nervous and impatient person is not easy to influence. And, of course, you may find something that creates some common denominators in your lives. Many people have a one dimensional image of environmentalists. Somehow they don’t think we have real lives, children, jobs, other interests. Breaking down the stereotypes is a significant part of your task. Once you’ve had a bit of small talk, move quickly into the main agenda. Be courteous. Show an awareness that this person is probably very busy. Ask at the outset how much time the person has until their next appointment, bearing in mind that meetings often start late and keep backing up. Do not take up more time than has been allotted. Present your case clearly and calmly. Give the decision maker your one-page note so they can follow along. Provide any more detailed papers you would like to leave as well. If your issue has a visual element, bring photos. Be sure to ask if the person has any questions. If you don’t know the answer to something, don’t bluff! Make a note and promise to get the information. And, then, remember to get it and send it to the decision- maker quickly, the next day if possible. Remember to ask clearly for what you want. And thank them, first, verbally, and then after with a thank you letter which reminds them graciously of any follow-up they offered to do. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Politicians are still just people. They are mostly honest, mostly over-worked, and often wrong. If you can help them to do the right thing, why not try? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Sierra Club of Canada is dedicated to developing a diverse, well-trained grassroots network working to protect the integrity of our global ecosystems. In pursuit of this goal, the Sierra Club of Canada holds Activist Training Workshops. If you or your local group would like to attend or arrange such a workshop, contact the National Office.

For more information please contact: Sierra Club of Canada National Office Tel: (613) 241-4611 Fax: (613) 241-2292 e-mail: info@sierraclub.ca web: www.sierraclub.ca_________________

Working hard to safeguard paddling assets for all Canadians

Working Hard to Safeguard Paddling Assets for All Canadians