Comments for Raincoast Conservation Foundation

Comment on Give the gift of art and conservation by Give the Gift of Art and Conservation | Eco Books 4 Kids

Give the Gift of Art and Conservation | Eco Books 4 Kids — Wed, 01 May 2013 02:14:57 +0000

[...] Give the gift of art and conservation [...]

Comment on Anti-pipeline art exhibit stirs controversy at Calgary City Hall by Powell River Film Festival: Reviews | OccuWorld

Powell River Film Festival: Reviews | OccuWorld — Thu, 25 Apr 2013 05:32:28 +0000

[...] . The “anti-pipeline” Exhibit has created a bit of a stir in some places, such as Calgary, where city officials claimed the atrium is not to be used for “political [...]

Comment on Anti-pipeline art exhibit stirs controversy at Calgary City Hall by Political Fail Blog | Powell River Film Festival: Reviews

Political Fail Blog | Powell River Film Festival: Reviews — Thu, 25 Apr 2013 03:48:40 +0000

[...] . The “anti-pipeline” Exhibit has created a bit of a stir in some places, such as Calgary, where city officials claimed the atrium is not to be used for “political [...]

Comment on Order – April 21, 2013 @ 10:26 AM by Andy

Andy — Tue, 23 Apr 2013 03:34:25 +0000

interac has been deposited by misty?

Comment on Controversial exhibit stays at city hall by Misty MacDuffee

Misty MacDuffee — Sat, 20 Apr 2013 20:36:51 +0000

Hi Ron
This is an important dialogue that needs to occur at a national level. Even though our concerns are rooted in the unacceptable risk to the coast, the problem is not just a pipeline and oil tankers. The problem is that the tar sands oil economy has far most costs locally, regionally and globally than can be justified by the profits that are garnered by the very few and the trickle down theory that this serves Canada. Tar sands development is one of the world’s most environmentally destructive activities. It destroys massive amounts of habitat, requires huge quantities of water and energy, and creates toxic waste water- all of these things compromise the livelihoods of people and communities often relying on the soil, water, air and resources being compromised by the tar sands (not to mention human health). Burning oil and pumping more fossil fuels into the atmosphere further threatens the planet’s ability to support life. These costs are not being borne by us, but by our children. I also don’t buy the argument that there is a choice between financial stability, employment education and sustainable energy alternatives.

Canada is in a perverse situation where we are currently importing oil from foreign sources (primarily to meet energy needs in eastern Canada) when we should be utilizing our own oil resources to meet our own domestic needs, not shipping it to offshore markets. We need a dialogue about our domestic energy future. It needs to be driven by Canadian citizens, not representatives for oil companies. Opposing pipelines and tankers is about ecological, social and economic cost of our oil economy. The tar sands are a strategic resource that Canada will need for its own utilization in bridging the gap to an alternative energy economy/society.

Mining the tar sands, piping it to the BC coast and shipping it to offshore markets doesn’t just poison the planet, it also undermines our energy security. Can you imagine the sustainable energy initiatives that could be implemented with the kind of money going into squeezing the last drops of ancient sunlight from the ground? That’s the conversation we need to have.

Comment on Controversial exhibit stays at city hall by Ron Craven

Ron Craven — Fri, 19 Apr 2013 17:04:34 +0000

It is very easy to say lets have a oil free coastline. However Canada’s resources play a major part in our employment and finacial stability including medical services and education. Which of these are you prepared to give up? Are you prepared for double digit unemployment? What future are you chosing for our young generation.
We need to be in a position to ship oil to countries who weren’t as fortunate to have abundant supplies as Canada. Do you not think another country would take our place and supply oil using waterways?
I support people who look for alternate solutions to challengesw. e.g. How can we make pipelines safer. How can we reduce the potential for spills which are with a few exceptions minor given the volumn transported by land and sea. The proposals of suspending pipeline constuction in the North and eliminating shipment of oil by tankers are not supported by 90% of the people I know. Looking for safer ways to accommodate oil movement is supported.

Ron

Comment on The Government’s Oil Spill Plans Are a Bit Too Slick by Misty MacDuffee

Misty MacDuffee — Fri, 12 Apr 2013 23:10:40 +0000

Yes, please send Sheri. thank you !

Comment on Order – March 14, 2013 @ 04:39 PM by Andy

Andy — Sun, 07 Apr 2013 20:22:44 +0000

her husband picked up 3 books from my house James Bay – Andy

Comment on Order – April 3, 2013 @ 05:26 PM by Andy

Andy — Sun, 07 Apr 2013 20:20:38 +0000

interac processed by misty

Comment on Order – April 4, 2013 @ 04:51 AM by Andy

Andy — Sun, 07 Apr 2013 20:16:46 +0000

charged an extra $20 for intl small packet shiping to australia via paypal invoice shipped april 7

Comment on The Government’s Oil Spill Plans Are a Bit Too Slick by sheri Farinha

sheri Farinha — Sat, 06 Apr 2013 03:13:21 +0000

Hi again!
I wrote a letter to the editor of PQB news regarding Joe Oliver. Lots of debate as a result.
Would you like a copy?

Comment on Art for an Oil-Free Coast Exhibition heads to Alberta by Sheri Farinha

Sheri Farinha — Sat, 06 Apr 2013 03:09:48 +0000

We are so excited for Raincoast. I think your timing is right. Knock ‘em dead!
CPOC and Sheri

Comment on Art for an Oil-Free Coast Exhibition heads to Alberta by Sheri Farinha

Sheri Farinha — Sat, 06 Apr 2013 03:09:02 +0000

We are so excited for Raincoast. I think your timing is right. Knock ‘em dead!
Sheri

Comment on Management Plan for humans submitted by BC wolves by Randy

Randy — Thu, 04 Apr 2013 04:05:42 +0000

I lived with a wolf companion for 19 years. Never was there any sort of threat. Never agression. I have been amongst wolves in the wild. The same outcome. They are more like us than we would like to admit…but let me qualify that… they are more like the compassionate, reasoning, and human types of reasonable people, than many humans. They are not a threat to humans or livestock. We are determining there fate on an incorrect hypothesis. We can live in harmony with nature, without threat for either side, and still have our modern progress.

Comment on Return of wolves prompts open hunting season by Ullrich K.

Ullrich K. — Sat, 30 Mar 2013 16:24:09 +0000

To me as a person living in Germany, this is truly outrageous.
The size of Germany is just over one third of British Columbia. We are densely populated with some 85 million inhabitants. Yet wolves are strictly protected and the public here are thrilled as wolves have returned from Poland into our country. There are efficient wildlife management plans established which ensure the survival of our wolves and bears. Presently nature conservation works with the farmers on how to minimize losses and to compensate for damages that occur. Farmers however are also require to take precautions.
In Germany wolves were eradicated in the 19th century in the same ruthless manner that the government of British Columbia is putting into practice now.
The cruel and – by all standards – uncivilized extermination of wolves in British Columbia by snares and open season, euphemistically called “management” is not going to remain unnoticed over here and will severely damage the reputation of British Columbia as a destination for tourism in the long run.