Sharks Need Love Too

I tend to have a different reaction to sharks than most people. I feel a deep affection for sharks and even seeing a photo of one makes me want to jump in the water and give it a hug.

Not only do many species of shark help regulate the ocean and ensure that humankind's oxygen supply is steady and balanced, but most divers will argue that they aren't the ferocious monsters that the media depicts them as.

Many people can tell you that an estimated 75,000,000-100,000,000 sharksare pulled out of our oceans every year to feed a growing demand for shark fin soup.

But a lesser known aspect of this problem is how current fishing methods used all over the world are putting not just sharks but our oceans in peril. You'd probably be surprised to discouver that something like our love for tuna is causing sharks to die. Common unsustainable fishing methods like bottom trawling mean that when fishing boats are looking for tuna they're catching sharks and lots of other species too.

Sharks and tuna often share the same space and when a large net is dragged along the bottom floor, it isn't able to discriminate between tuna or anything else. The result is bycatch and lots of it. Bycatch is any untargeted species that is caught. Many times the bycatch is thrown back in the water (of course almost everything is dead at this point).

Bottom trawling is only one of many common unsustainable fishing methods that result in large amounts of bycatch. Long line fishing and Muraomi nets are other examples. Bycatch has become a major concern for scientists, ocean lovers, and of course shark huggers and many feel that bycatch and modern fishing practices is one of the biggest threats facing our oceans.

'Saving Sharks' is complicated and it's not as simple as getting people to stop eating soup (although it would help sharks dramatically). Legislation, improved conservation, less shark fin soup, and dramatic changes in fishing regulations are all needed to keep sharks in the water.

But where do we begin? Well if you ask me, it's by getting people to love sharks.



(find out more information at www.wakeproject.net)

China- Environmental Leader?

China gets a lot of flack, as the most populated country on the planet it frequently comes under fire for human rights violations, environmental degradation, and questionable ethical behavior.

But as the world's likely next super power China has begun to show some promise. Taking a cue from Bolivia, China recently banned animals in circus' and restricted animals in zoos. Wow. This is huge. Can you image anything like that happening in North America? Barnes and Bailey wouldn't let that happen without a fight.

China has also organized an annual tree planting drive that has seen over 12 billion trees planted in the last 32 years that has resulted in forested areas increasing and in 2001, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) listed China among the top 15 countries with the most "closed forest" ....um what?

The surprises don't stop there, China is also invests the most worldwide in 'clean technology' and made free plastic bags illegal in 2008.

Sorry, am I the only one surprised by this? Who is doing China's PR? I get that despite these efforts China is still one of the worst pollutors on the planet but how does China have such a bad rap when we have the TAR SANDS??

Keep updated on China's environmental efforts here.

Obama's Report Card

Interesting Review of Obama's environmental record this far. Click Here.

The Last Mass Extinction

I've mentioned before that our oceans take unimaginable abuse and for the most part it's out of sight out of mind. I've also mentioned that it won't be long before we realize just how vital the ocean is to our survival.

If history has taught us anything, it's that it can repeat itself.

Approximately 250 million years ago, the world's oceans ran out of oxygen. One theory is that this was brought on by asteroid filled with "soccer ball-shaped molecules called "fullerenes" (or "buckyballs") with traces of helium and argon gas trapped inside" and about 9K wide colliding with the planet which then changed the climate of the earth.

To continue to quote the article referenced about, not all scientists agree on the details of the cause of the climate change but the general consensus is that the Great Dying was caused by the buildup of carbon dioxide both in the sea and on land.

Most people are familiar with the extinction of dinosaurs a mere 65 million years ago, however this is different. The Great Dying resulted in 90% of all species on the planet dying. That means 90% of all plants, animals, fish, insects, and life on this planet went extinct....forever (just thought I'd drive that home)

We are once again at a point where carbon dioxide is building up in our oceans and air at a rapid pace only this time it's done consciously by human beings.

Even if humans were to survive another great extinction, life would be drastically different for us and would take millions of years for an ecosystem to stabalize.

The point is that even though we're making a real effort to protect our oceans and eat sustainably, it's not enough. We need drastic change and we need it now. We simply cannot allow our leaders to continue to refuse to curb emissions not only because we want to protect their environment but because it is critical to our own survial.

Sharks: Helping Us Breathe Easy

I've been neglecting this blog lately but you can check out a piece I did on sharks here.

Senate’s “kill bill” move a blow to Canadians and democracy

I don't usually re-post other articles completely but I completely agree with David Suzuki on this one and felt it was worth re-posting (to read it online click here):

On November 16, Canadian senators killed Bill C-311, the Climate Change Accountability Act, with a surprise vote. The way the vote was carried out is an insult to Canadians and democracy. It’s also further evidence that Canada will go to the UN Climate Change negotiations in Cancun, Mexico, on November 29, with nothing to offer but empty words and an unwillingness to tackle what leading scientists say is the most serious crisis facing Canada and the world.

Even though the bill had been delivered to the Senate 193 days before, after being passed by the House of Commons, the vote was called without notice and without debate, when at least 15 Liberal senators and several independent senators were absent. This law, which would have put our country on track to be an environmental leader, was killed by only 11 votes (43 to 32).

Prime Minister Stephen Harper once promised he would never allow the unelected Senate to go against the will of the majority of Members of Parliament and the Canadian public. But with this vote in a Senate stacked by the prime minister, he has done exactly that.

The Act would have committed Canada to an 80 per cent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 and a 25 per cent reduction by 2020. Many international scientists agree that these reductions are the least required to prevent dangerous climate change.

But in a near-unprecedented move that flies in the face of democratic traditions and government accountability, Conservative senators killed this modest piece of legislation. At nearly 75 years old, I am sickened to see people my age making such a reckless decision that will affect the lives of today’s young people and generations to come when many of the senators won’t even be around to face the most serious consequences.

When his government was first elected in 2006, Prime Minister Harper told Canadians that “Restoring accountability will be one of the major priorities of our new government. Accountability is what ordinary Canadians, working Canadians, those people who pay their bills, pay their taxes, expect from their political leaders.”

It appears that was just empty rhetoric – especially when it comes to climate change. Our government has dismissed its obligation under the Kyoto Protocol, an international climate change agreement that Canada and 186 countries ratified. Our government has not implemented any substantial policies aimed at curbing greenhouse gas emissions and helping Canada join the emerging clean-energy economy, even though Canada is probably more vulnerable to the effects of climate change than any other industrialized country.

The government claims the cost of reducing emissions will be economically devastating yet continues to heavily subsidize and support the polluting fossil fuel industry, especially in the environmentally destructive tar sands. Canada has even earned itself the shameful reputation for obstructing progress at international negotiations on climate change.

Prime Minister Harper’s contention that the bill would have thrown “hundreds of thousands and possibly millions of people out of work” is simply false. In California, voters resisted attempts by out-of-state oil companies in the November 2 election to overturn the state’s Global Warming Solutions Act. Since the law was passed in 2006, California has attracted more investments in alternative energy start-up companies than anywhere in the world and has seen a boom in employment in the clean energy sector. Those investments tripled to US$2.9 billion over the past year alone, according to the Los Angeles Times.

According to Reuters news, “The world’s low carbon energy market is expected to treble in a decade, and analysts say major economies including Japan, the United States and China will be jostling for a slice of the market likely to be worth $2.2 trillion by 2020.”

And economists, including former World Bank chief economist Nicholas Stern, have concluded that failing to reduce greenhouse gas emissions will have catastrophic economic consequences.

Canadians have seen far more leadership from municipal and provincial governments than from the federal government on environmental issues related to climate change. Ontario is phasing out coal power and has implemented incentives to attract clean-energy technologies. Vancouver is moving ahead with its ambitious green plans, and B.C. has implemented a carbon tax that increases over time.

As Canadians, we expect more of our leaders. At the very least, we expect them to remember that we still live in a democracy and that its rules must be respected.

Earthlings

"The Stages of Truth:

1. Ridicule

2. Violent Opposition

3. Acceptance"

-Earthlings

That is how the documentary "Earthlings" begins, a film that looks at the ways animals are expolited by human beings and is directed by Joaquin Pheonix.

This film was released in 2007 and although I had heard alot about it, I had never seen it. Here's the thing, I knew it would be filled with some graphic images and I feel that I don't have to see them. I don't eat meat or animal products, wear leather, buy products tested on animals, wear silk, wool, don't donate to charities that test on animals, visit zoos or aquariums, or support any other establishment that expolits animals. Do I sound holier than thou? Yes. But that means that I don't have to watch undercover video of a slaughterhouse. In my opinion I've earned it.

But I went to see it nonetheless, and if you want to hate humankind this is the film for you. I'm still losing sleep over the footage of a dog being thrown in a trashcompactor as it looks on helplessly and will never forget how the screams of a cow or pig sound like a human.

The sad part is that the people that need to see this film won't. The theatre was filled with tree-hugging hippies like me. Except one person came in with a cheese pizza, I'm guessing they felt bad about their choices real quick.

I only stayed half way through, my friend and I were so shaken that we had to leave. I think the most disturbing aspect of the entire experience was that it wasn't footage from a faraway country or another century. All of it had to do with very common industries and very very common products.

Most friends that I've told about the film have said that they couldn't handle it and wouldn't be able to see it. I can't handle it either, how long are we going to pretend that inconvenient truths don't exhist? Or even accept the reality of where our food and clothing comes from?