Moncton’s Automated Meter Reading System wins recognition

*Le texte français suit.

November 3, 2008

Moncton’s Automated Meter Reading System garners positive industry attention

MONCTON – The Atlantic Canada Water Works Association (ACWWA), as well as the Canadian Association of Municipal Administrators (CAMA), have recently recognized the City of Moncton’s automated water meter reading system as a leader in water conservation and environmentally sound practices.

The ACWWA recently awarded the 2008 Project of the Year award to the City of Moncton in the greater than 25,000 (population) category. By remotely reading each meter at least four times per day, Moncton is able to profile water usage and identify high consumption and leakage on the customer side so that customers can be made aware when their consumption is abnormally high. This latest technology is the first RF (radio frequency) Fixed Network system used in Canada.

Vote for Environment in Canada's election 2008

http://www.voteforenvironment.ca/

Health report to get 'low-profile' release

BILL CURRY
From Wednesday's Globe and Mail
July 23, 2008 at 4:30 AM EDT

OTTAWA — The Conservative government is planning a quiet release for a major Health Canada report that warns of the harmful impact of climate change on the health of Canadians, particularly the young, elderly and aboriginals.

Should the department follow through with its communications plan, it will be the second time this year that the government has taken such an approach with a major climate-change study.
Those involved with the report were informed in a July 3 conference call that the government is preparing a "low-profile release" on the Health Canada website, rather than launching the report with major media fanfare, sources told The Globe and Mail.

Green Festival seeks musical submissions - Deadline July 18th

Green Festival seeks musical submissions

-by Chuck Teed [07/07/08]

The first annual Green Festival will take place in Clairville, New Brunswick August 30 - September 1, 2008. The festival features three days of music and environmental awareness, as well as information from conservation groups, green product manufacturers and an organic farmers market. The Green Festival is currently looking for acts to perform at the festival.

N.B. Green Festival looking for Eco-friendly participants! - Deadline August 15th

The Green Festival“Family Fun, Music & Much More!!!”
30 August, 31 August & 1 September, 2008
10:00 am to 6:00 pm

Claireville, New Brunswick
Details follow.

For further information, or to ask about renting space at this festival, please contact Peter and Rachel at 1-506-785-6685 or email pgajames@nb.sympatico.ca:

Canada missing green

Canada missing green
The Toronto Sun
Fri 27 Jun 2008 Page: 12 Section: News Byline: BY VIVIAN SONG, SUN MEDIA

Canada fails to recognize that there's money to be made in developing a green economy, some of Canada's brightest scientists heard yesterday at a 20-year conference reunion.

"There is profit to be made in developing technology to fight pollution," said Howard Ferguson, the original chairman of the historic climate Our Changing Atmosphere: Implications for Global Security conference in 1988.

Letters
Times & Transcript, Published Thursday April 3rd, 2008
Appeared on page D7

Info session showed concerns

To The Editor:

It's unfortunate that no one from the Times & Transcript was able to
attend the Information Session on Uranium Exploration and Mining held
March 30 at the Capitol Theatre. Had a journalist been there, it could
have been reported that the theatre was full, and that the mood of the
crowd was calm, friendly and respectful.

There were no shouts of anger or fear, just very concerned people
seeking information and asking questions. It lasted until almost 11
p.m. for those who needed more detailed information specific to their
needs.

There were no MLAs from the governing political party, but there were
a few from the Opposition. The speakers, including a lawyer, a doctor,
and an economist were very informative.

The reportage from this session would have tied in nicely with your
reporter's interview with geologist and employee of the Federal
Department of Natural Resources, Charlie Jefferson. Had your reporter
been at the info session, he could have shared, in that interview,
some of the concerns brought up Sunday evening.

It's true that most people are somewhat concerned about radiation, but
foremost, people have been upset by the antiquated mining laws that
squelch the rights of property owners, and the possibility that a mine
would be set up on their property.

Comparing the consequences of uranium mining with the damage the sun
does to our skin was a trivial comment. People are concerned about
that aspect of uranium mining, but they are also concerned about the
havoc mining wreaks upon the landscape, the ecosystem in general and,
in the Moncton area, the potential damage mining of any sort would do
to our water system.

I would ask, having seen pictures of various lakes destroyed by
uranium mining in northern Saskatchewan and Ontario, how many lakes
has the sun destroyed?

I would also ask these questions of the leaders in this province who
look upon mining as a great way to enrich New Brunswick:

How responsible have mining companies been about cleaning up after
they have finished their business in that area?

How has the uranium mining in northern Saskatchewan benefited the
people of northern Saskatchewan? Has it made them better off
financially? Has it made them healthier and able to enjoy their
environment?

Read about Elliot Lake and see how many people live there now.
(Ironically, it has been billed as a great place to retire, since
child-raising families don't tend to want to live there any more.)

Check out the problems people in Port Hope are having with a uranium
refinery in their town in the March '08 issue of the Canadian
magazine, "The Walrus".

It is essential to give balanced information about this critical
issue, but the timing of the placement of this particular interview
seems manipulative. Sunday evening's exceptionally well-attended
Information Session was newsworthy in and of itself, and should have
been given some coverage.

Helene Robb,
Moncton

Also in today's Times & Transcript:

Uranium poses too much risk

To The Editor:

In response to the article "How Dangerous is Uranium?" in the Times &
Transcript, March 31, thank you for bringing up some important
information in regard to uranium mining.

Every debate should feature both sides of an issue to educate the public.

I found it interesting how it was alluded to that the effects of
exposure to uranium were dismissed as being inconsequential to the
health of the people of southeast New Brunswick.

Yes, we are quite aware that uranium has not suddenly appeared in New
Brunswick by a divine intervention and that it has been here since the
beginning of time.

Yes, we are quite aware that we are exposed on a daily basis and that
radon gas makes up of 50 per cent of the radiation exposure most of us
live with.

Yes, we are quite aware that any drilling, be it a water well or
exploration for any mineral, has the potential of disrupting the
naturally occurring uranium and its progeny and releasing it into the
environment.

What we are debating is the amount (dosage) and type of exposure and
the risk factors that are related by increasing this exposure.

Yes, we know that alpha rays cannot penetrate the skin but it does
enter our body through the lungs (hence radon gas being the number two
risk factor for lung cancer), and is absorbed through our intestinal
wall. I have no plans on eating granite, but I do have plans of eating
food, that has hopefully been grown here in New Brunswick
(self-sufficiency?).

We are debating the need to go ahead with exploration and mining in
sensitive areas such as watersheds that supply 40 per cent of New
Brunswickers with their drinking water.

Numerous government officials have casually, some with a hint of
laughter, stated that the chances of opening an actual mine are very
slim and we should not worry. My question to them is why have
unprotected sex if you don't plan on getting pregnant or contracting
an STD?

You may be surprised to learn that arsenic, a fabled poison, is
naturally present in apples, much of your food and in your drinking
water. As you are probably aware, you will not die of arsenic
poisoning by eating an apple, or even an apple every day and most of
us are exposed to arsenic on a daily basis (along with other "toxic"
chemical compounds). But you are probably not aware that increasing
the dose of arsenic, such as eating a half cup of apple seeds, can
kill you, quite rapidly. In some individuals they may need less than
this, others will need to eat more.

Everyone has a different tolerance dependant on their existing state
of health.

Small exposure to uranium in its natural state won't kill or make you
sick instantly. In some individuals it may have absolutely no effect
on their health. But increasing the exposure (somewhat recklessly
since as a nation we export 85 per cent of the uranium produced here)
will have some effects on the health of the people of southeast New
Brunswick. Some will feel the effect more rapidly than others if their
state of health is already compromised, others will be more resilient.

Is the New Brunswick government retracting to Darwinian idealisms
where only the strong will survive? Is this part of their strategy to
rectify the current health care crisis?

My suggestion is to let the people vote and decide if they want to
gamble with their health, the health of their fellow citizens and of
future generations for the sake of a few dollars. I still believe that
New Brunswick is part of the first world but at times it feels more
like a third world dictatorship.

Lise Fournier,
Manager,
Canadian School of Natural Nutrition,
Moncton

Public Awareness Meeting about Uranium Mining, Capitol Theatre March 30th, 7pm

A map showing the blocks of current claims surrounding the Moncton Area.


In order to inform the public about the large scale uranium mining plans already in motion for south eastern New Brunswick, a Public Awareness Meeting will take place at 7pm on Sunday March 30th, at the Capitol Theatre on Main Street in Moncton.


If anyone is interested in speaking at the meeting (especially if you happen to be well informed on the topic),
please contact Mr. Christian Theriault at ravenseye@hotmail.com

Uranium mining in New-Brunswick…did you know?

Multinational mining companies have thousands of mineral claims around New-Brunswick with the goal to find and extract Uranium for the energy market.

These mining claims are not restricted to crown lands. One such claim may be right on your property or next to it. Furthermore, mining Uranium is incredibly dangerous to people in the surrounding areas. Uranium is water soluble and the radioactive dust is airborne and at low altitude for hundreds of miles.

For more info on the health hazards of uranium mining, see
http://www.miningwatch.ca/index.php?/Uranium
http://www.ccnr.org/uranium_deadliest.html

Uranium prospecting is being conducted in areas between Sussex and Moncton, including land that borders Turtle creek, the drinking water supply for Moncton, Riverview and Dieppe residents. Mineral exploration and prospecting on 'PRIVATE PROPERTY' have taken place near Moncton, on the Ammon and Irishtown Rds, near the Irishtown water reservoir, in the Shenstone valley and many surrounding areas.

See this map for claims in an area near you:
http://www1.gnb.ca/0078/GeoscienceDatabase/Claims/ClaimMaps-e.asp
Under the present mining act, the province of New Brunswick owns the mineral rights under your top soil (the top six inches of your property) if you are in a rural area. The government can authorize a mining company to exploit a mine if they find sufficient mineral deposits to do so. What that means for you is expropriation if it’s on your property or Cancer and Diabetes if it’s next door and you decide to stay. (you may get a small compensation if it’s your land but you have to leave.)

Our government will listen if enough citizens speak up. Together we can mobilize our province and ban Uranium mining. Please read and consider signing this petition:
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/stop-uranium-mining-in-new-brunswick
Please forward this to your friends and family and encourage them to do the same.


This map shows the claims on the claims over the Watershed and the McGlauglin Road Reservoir.


*******************************************



Is the Health and Future of New Brunswick for sale!

According to the New Brunswick Natural Resource Directory, Multinational Mining companies have legally staked Uranium mining claims on private property and crown land throughout New Brunswick (1) including the turtle creek watershed area responsible for the Greater Moncton drinking water supply.

After consulting a number of credible international and Canadian academic studies (2) documenting the health and environmental risks associated with Uranium mining, I am appalled that our own Premier and his administration are willing to allow these companies to expose our air, water and soil to the toxins produced by Uranium mining in exchange for short term employment and money for the province.

How can this be since it has been demonstrated how lethal Uranium can be! and as Dr. Gordon Edwards, President of the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility ( http://www.ccnr.org/ ) points out: '... not only is exposed uranium dangerous , but it also lasts an eternity due to the half-life of thorium-230, the parent of radium. According to the CCNR, the quantity of Thorium 230 in uranium mining tailings will diminish by only one-half in roughly 245,000 years.”

Why then is the government of New-Brunswick considering uranium mining to be the way for developing new jobs and bringing money into the province? Will not the long term health costs
( http://www.ccnr.org/ceac_B.html ) and environmental costs (http://www.ccnr.org/Findings_Tailings.html )
offset any short term profits? Uranium doesn’t only affect the miners but everyone within hundreds of miles of a mine. Is this really how New-Brunswick wants to fulfill its goal for self sufficiency?

Dr. Gordon Edwards explains that 'Bringing uranium to the surface through mining operations can release dust particles that can be lethal even in tiny quantities. Uranium goes through many changes, more lethal types of radioactive particles that can invade the human body, mutate cells and cause all sorts of damage. Uranium mines in Ontario and Saskatchewan have large deposits of waste materials that will remain toxic for hundreds of thousands of years.” New Brunswick should not follow this deadly path.

I am officially requesting that the government of New Brunswick ban uranium mining and prospecting in our province. I agree with Dr. Edwards that in these times of environmental calamities, New Brunswick should be looking to invest in renewable, clean energy sources (3), such as geothermal, wind, the new solar technologies, tidal, and earth energy. Let's create sustainable jobs and money in a manner that will allow us to maintain our healthy lifestyles, and provide a safe place to live for our children and grand children.

(1) http://www1.gnb.ca/0078/GeoscienceDatabase/Claims/ClaimMaps-e.asp
(2) http://www.ccnr.org/
http://www.wise-uranium.org/index.html
http://www.miningwatch.ca/index.php?/Uranium
http://www.energyprobe.org/energyprobe/index.cfm
(3) http://offshoreenergyresearch.ca/OEER/StrategicEnvironmentalAssessment/BackgroundreportfortheFundyTidalEnergySEA/tabid/280/Default.aspx
http://www.gnb.ca/0085/alt.htm
http://www.canren.gc.ca/default_en.asp
http://www.ccnr.org/amory.html

Public Event on Uranium Mining, May 30th, 7pm Capitol Theatre, Moncton

EVENT

1. Uranium Mining in New Brunswick / Des mines d'Uranium au Nouveau-Brunswick?

NEWS

2. Moncton MLA seeks uranium moratorium
3. Moncton wants N.B. to ban uranium mining
4. Leader speaks from jail; Lovelace resolves to continue fight
5. Ardoch leader left in jail; Oversight causes Bob Lovelace to miss court
date

-----------------------------------------------------------------

1. Uranium Mining in New Brunswick
Sunday, March 30th, 2008, Capitol Theater, Moncton, 7pm
Admission is free. You are invited! Bring a neighbour.  A Public Awareness
Night on the effects of test drilling and uranium mining on our health and
our ecosystem. Learn the facts!  Do not allow the government and mining
companies to put our wildlife, water table and air at risk. Film Screening,
Guest Speakers and Open Discussion.  “Our lives begin to end the day we
become silent about things that matter" - Dr. Martin Luther King. For more
information: call (506) 389-9818 or (506) 855-0863  or visit:
http://web.mac.com/uraniumnb/uranium/Welcome.html Organized by the South
East Chapter – www.conservationcouncil.ca/

Des mines d'Uranium au Nouveau-Brunswick?
Réunion d'information publique  Dimanche, 30 Mars, 19h. Théâtre
Capitole  Moncton. Admission gratuite. Venez vous informer sur les effets
nocifs de la prospection et de l'exploitation de l'uranium sur votre santé
et notre environnement. Vous êtes invité(e)s! et Emmenez votre voisin(e).
Venez vous informer sur les faits, ne laissez pas le gouvernement et les
compagnies minières mettre notre eau potable et notre environnement en
danger! Cette soirée comprend des sujets d'information importants ainsi
qu'une présentation vidéo sur le sujet.
« Nos vies commencent à la fin de la journée nous devenons le silence sur
les choses qui comptent. » - Dr. Martin Luther King. Pour plus
d'information: téléphonez (506) 389-9818 ou (506) 855-0863 or visit:
http://web.mac.com/uraniumnb/uranium/Welcome.html  Branche du sud-est –
www.conservationcouncil.ca/

NEWS

2. Moncton MLA seeks uranium moratorium
Minister says modern exploration techniques are safe
By Jesse Robichaud
Times & Transcript Staff
Published Thursday March 20th, 2008

Moncton Crescent Conservative MLA John Betts has tabled a motion asking the
legislature to establish an immediate moratorium on uranium exploration in
the Moncton area.

The motion asks that the moratorium be upheld until "appropriate and
acceptable public hearings have been held."

The motion cities the potential damage to the environment and citizens'
health in relation to the fact that the Turtle Creek watershed, which is a
source of drinking water for the City of Moncton and surrounding areas, has
been staked for prospecting.

"The possible health risks to individuals resulting from the mining
operations, radioactive tailings, and chemicals used to extract the uranium
are substantial," said Betts.

"The potential for water supplies to become contaminated with uranium,
radon gas and chemicals is significant."

However, Natural Resources Minister Donald Arseneault appeared less
concerned by the exploration boom, which is being fuelled by the rising
price of uranium.

"It is very easy for people to make declarations when they haven't been on
the site to see what the activities are," said Arsenault, who is overseeing
a mining sector that is in full development in the province.

"The things people are talking about are things that happened 30 or 40
years ago," he said, noting that regulations and technology have made for
much safer exploration practices.

Arseneault didn't offer any indications he would consider the motion, and
said that Nova Scotia is considering lifting their ban on uranium
exploration in that province. However, environmental groups there have
vowed to fight it.

3. Moncton wants N.B. to ban uranium mining
CBC News, March 18, 2008

City council in Moncton, N.B., voted unanimously Monday night to call on
the province to ban all uranium exploration and mining in New Brunswick.

The councillors are particularly worried about uranium exploration on the
outskirts of the city.

The mining giant Vale Inco (formerly known as CVRD-Inco) is exploring for
uranium south and west of Moncton.

A smaller exploration company announced two weeks ago it found an
interesting deposit just north of the city.

Coun. Louisa Barton-Duguay said she feels besieged by the mining companies.

"[That's] because there's properties that have been staked right up to our
boundaries. Moncton's ringed," she said.

"I believe this resolution needs to be passed tonight to protect our
province too. I don't think it should be the garbage dump of North America,
which some of our premiers seem to want to make it."

Councillor Pierre Boudreau said it should be about protecting the
environment and people's health.

"We're talking about big money," Boudreau said. "That should not be what
rules the day in New Brunswick on an issue that could affect the health of
our children and ourselves."

Two councillors noted they've already tried to stop oil and gas exploration
in the city's watershed. A resolution to that affect was sent to Premier
Shawn Graham months ago.

So far it's been ignored.

4. Leader speaks from jail; Lovelace resolves to continue fight
The Kingston Whig-Standard
20 May 2008

The Queen's University lecturer who is becoming the central figure in the
battle against a proposed uranium mine north of Kingston said his time
behind bars hasn't weakened his resolve to keep fighting.

"My only regret is that I should have started earlier and worked harder,"
Ardoch Algonquin community leader Bob Lovelace said from a Lindsay jail.

Lovelace is serving a six-month sentence for refusing to stop opposing
uranium prospecting efforts near Sharbot Lake by Oakville-based Frontenac
Ventures. He has now been behind bars in the Central East Correctional
Centre for five weeks.

One of the province's new super jails, the correctional centre is a harsh
mix of steel and concrete where the inmates sleep two to an approximately
three-metre-by-two-metre cell in ranges of 30 men or more and wear
identical orange uniforms. They get out of their cells three times a day
for a total of 7.5 hours.

"It's not a great place to spend time," Lovelace said Tuesday. "Personally,
right now, I'd rather be out playing with my kids and finishing my courses."

Nonetheless, he said, he's doing OK.

It helps that he is familiar with life behind bars as a result of running a
regular aboriginal sweat lodge at Kingston Penitentiary from 1984 to 1992.

"I understand a little about ... how to get along," he said.

To stave off the constant push of boredom, Lovelace writes letters to
supporters, designs a house he hopes to build with his Algonquin friend
Harold Perry, and reads whatever he can get his hands on.

"I got Scientific American in my canteen on Sunday and I was so hard up for
good reading material that I read it in about three and-a-half hours -
every word, including the ads," he said.

Lovelace understands he could get out of prison within a few weeks, if he
was willing to follow a judge's order to stop blocking Frontenac Ventures
from working at the prospecting site on Highway 509.

But that's not going to happen, he said.

"This is really the front line of the greening of Ontario and a better
relationship between aboriginal people and the government," he said. "We've
just got to keep at it until the politicians wake up and start talking
because right now they seem to be fast asleep."

Sharbot Lake isn't the only frontier where aboriginals are going to jail
for fighting mining interests.

On Monday, a judge in Thunder Bay sentenced six members of the remote
northwestern Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug (KI) First Nation, including its
chief, to six months in jail for obstructing an exploration company's
access to lands near the local reserve.

Lovelace was sad to hear they had received the same maximum sentence for
contempt of court that he received, but he hadn't heard the OPP have just
charged six more people at the Sharbot Lake-area site for being inside a
200-metre no-go zone.

It's hard to get news in jail, he said.

He can receive only two visits per week and can only call people collect
from a payphone he shares on the prison range with more than 30 other men.

He said he's been trying to reach Ardoch Algonquin lawyer Chris Reid for
more than a week without luck.

Reid, who is defending the Ardochs for hunting meat, has had his hands
full. He is also defending the KI First Nation.

Incidentally, Frontenac Ventures lawyer Neal Smitheman is also representing
Platinex, the exploration company drilling in Thunder Bay.

After returning from the northern town Monday, a frustrated Reid joked with
the Whig-Standard that all his clients are being locked away.

Unbeknownst to him, Lovelace was supposed to appear in court Tuesday, but
Smitheman failed to arrange his transport order.

Lovelace said Tuesday afternoon that he didn't know what was going on.

"I'm sort of in the dark right now," he said.

He isn't the only person who has been found in contempt of court in
relation to protests against mining exploration north of Sharbot Lake.

Ardoch Algonquin co-Chief Paula Sherman, Elder Harold Perry, and members of
the Shabot Obaadjiwan were found in contempt of an earlier interim
injunction issued by another judge.

The Shabot Obaadjiwan have opted out of the struggle, claiming their real
dispute is with the provincial and federal governments.

On Tuesday, they entered into a second undertaking promising to try to
discourage other members of their community and other organizations from
interfering.

Perry and Sherman have entered into similar undertakings, but they still
received fines. Sherman was fined $15,000, the Ardochs were fined $10,000
and Lovelace was fined $25,000, with a provision for additional fines of
$2,000 a day for any future violations.

They all still face prosecution on the charges arising from a second
judge's injunction.


5. Ardoch leader left in jail; Oversight causes Bob Lovelace to miss court
date
Posted By Sue Yanagisawa
19 March 2008
http://www.thewhig.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=949696

A second round of contempt charges against two Algonquin communities and
several of their supporters, arising out of last summer's uranium-mine
protests north of Sharbot Lake, never really got off the ground yesterday.

In mid-February, Superior Court Justice Douglas Cunningham sent Queen's
University lecturer Robert Lovelace, a spokesman for the Ardoch Algonquin
First Nation, to jail for six months after Lovelace refused to stop
opposing the prospecting plans of Oakville-based Frontenac Ventures Corp.
But Lovelace, whose image was on multiple placards stuck in the snowbanks
along Court Street yesterday, never arrived inside the Frontenac County
Court House.
Frontenac Ventures' lawyer Neal Smitheman, who's prosecuting the contempt
charges, failed to arrange for a "production order" to bring him from the
Central East jail in Lindsay, where he's currently being held.

Lawyer Chris Reid, who represents the Ardoch Algonquin First Nation and
Lovelace as a member of that community, told the judge he'd received an
e-mail the previous night around 11 p.m. asking "what arrangements I'd made
to have Bob Lovelace here, and I said: 'None. He's not my prisoner.' "

Three days had been scheduled this week to deal with a second round of
charges, alleging that leaders and members of the Ardoch Algonquin
community and Shabot Obaadjiwan First Nation defied Cunningham's injunction
of Sept. 27, placing themselves in contempt of a court order.

The injunction required that Frontenac Ventures have "unfettered and
unobstructed access," to the 58.6-square kilometres of Crown and private
lands that form its mineral exploration claim. The Algonquin had set up a
protest camp just inside the gates of the company's base camp early last
summer.

Cunningham has already found that Lovelace, Ardoch Algonquin co-Chief Paula
Sherman, Elder Harold Perry and members of the Shabot Obaadjiwan were in
contempt of an earlier interim injunction issued by another judge. He
jailed Lovelace for refusing to "purge his contempt" on that order,
stipulating that his six-month sentence could be discharged at any time if
he agrees to sign an undertaking promising to stop troubling Frontenac
Ventures.

Shabot Obaadjiwan opted out of the struggle with the prospecting company
early in the last hearing and the community's lawyer, Stephen Reynolds,
said yesterday that their real dispute is with the provincial and federal
governments.

On behalf of the community, Shabot Obaadjiwan Chief Doreen Davis and Elder
Earl Bedore signed undertakings on the first set of charges in February,
agreeing not to interfere with Frontenac Ventures activities, including
drilling. They entered into a second undertaking yesterday, agreeing that
they'll try to discourage other members of their community and other
organizations from interfering. Smitheman told the judge that his client
would not seek any further sanctions against them, although his client is
asking for court costs, which are still being negotiated.

Ardoch Elder Harold Perry and Chief Paula Sherman entered into similar
undertakings in February, but Cunningham imposed fines of $15,000 against
Sherman, $10,000 against the community and $25,000 against Lovelace, with
provision for additional fines of $2,000 a day for any future violations.
They also still face prosecution on the charges arising from Cunningham's
injunction.

Lawyer Chris Reid has filed an appeal of Cunningham's earlier decision,
including an order striking his clients' counter-suit challenging the
Mining Act.
Smitheman withdrew contempt charges "without costs" against private
landowner Frank Morrison and Christian Peacemakers David Milne and Rev.
John Hudson, three non-Natives charged with defying the initial August
interim injunction, but split from the proceedings in February.

In the meantime, however, the OPP has laid new charges, served just the
night before against six people - one of whom hadn't been located - for
being inside the 200-metre set-back from the property's front gates over
the weekend.

The group charged included Oskar Graf, founder of the Blue Skies Music
Festival, who was represented by Kingston defence lawyer Fergus O'Connor.

O'Connor told Cunningham, "by my instructions, my client didn't breach
either the letter or the spirit of your honour's order," and told the judge
he was prepared to go to trial then and there. Smitheman admitted he didn't
know anything about the substance of the charges, which were laid under the
auspices of the "John Doe" and "Jane Doe" warrants he demanded be issued to
the OPP in February. He said he'd need time to investigate them.

Those new charges and the outstanding allegations against Ardoch Algonquin
First Nation, as well as Shabot Obaadjiwan's counter-claim seeking summary
judgment against the government of Canada, have all been put over to June 2.

Do You Know Where Your Food Comes From?

Organic farm builds connections between Metro Moncton residents and their food

===================================

Who:
Amarosia Organic Garden

What:
Organic Gardening Classes and Organic 'Farm Share Program'.

When:
Organic Gardening Classes
Thursday evenings, 6:30 to 8:30pm, March 27th to April 17th

Farm Share Memberships
March through May 2008

Where:
Organic Gardening Classes
The Canadian School of Natural Nutrition, 7 Beech St, Moncton.

Farms Share Memberships
Sequoia Whole Foods,132, Weldon St, Moncton.


=========================================

Organic Gardening Classes

“The best way to know where your food comes from and how it is grown, isto grow it yourself” said Rowena Hopkins, organic farmer and organicfarm inspector. “Having your own organic garden allows you to eat freshproduce at peak ripeness, safe in the knowledge that there will be nounnecessary chemicals contaminating your food.”

Her organic gardening course, which takes place at the Canadian Schoolof Natural Nutrition over a four week period, covers a multitude ofthemes from developing alternative strategies for bug control, topermaculture, to growing tomatoes with more vitamins. The level of thecourse is pitched to beginners, but more experienced gardeners can alsolearn a lot. “Gardeners never stop learning!”

====================================

Organic Farm Share Program

For people who lack the time or space to develop their own little piece of Eden, Amarosia Organic Garden is providing them with the opportunityto share in a piece of theirs. Their new 'Farm Share Program' benefitsboth the 'food-growers' and the 'food-eaters' by strengthening the linesof communication between them.

Members purchase their 'Farm Shares' in the spring which allows Rowenaand David, the food-growers, to purchase important items such as seedand equipment. Members then receive a basket of fresh seasonal produceonce a week for 22 weeks from June to October. “We benefit from thesecurity of knowing that our vegetables are already sold, allowing us tofocus on growing premium produce. Our members benefit from knowing thatthey will always receive the freshest, most delicious vegetables andherbs, without having to be at the market at 7am.”said Rowena.

In addition, 'Farm Share' members receive recipes, updates from thefarm, the opportunity to communicate with the farmer about which veggiesthey like and what they would like to see more of, plus nutritionalinformation from 'The Holistic Dietitian' and an annual 'open farm day'exclusive to Farm Share Members.

“People are becoming more concerned about where their food comes from. By either growing it themselves or building a strong, lasting connectionwith the people who grow it for them, they can feel more secure in theknowledge that they are providing the very best for their families.”

======================================

For details on the Organic Farm Share Program and Organic GardeningClasses, including registration, please visit http://www.amarosia.com/ , email info@amarosia.com or call Rowena on (506) 533-1087

======================================

Rowena Hopkins & David Méthot
Jardin biologique Amarosia Ltée / Amarosia Organic Garden Ltd.
469 Route 530,
Grande-Digue NB
E4R 5E1
Canada

tel./fax.: 1.506.533.1087
info@amarosia.com
http://www.amarosia.com/

The Story of Stuff with Annie Leonard

http://www.storyofstuff.com/


What is the Story of Stuff?

From its extraction through sale, use and disposal, all the stuff in our lives affects communities at home and abroad, yet most of this is hidden from view. The Story of Stuff is a 20-minute, fast-paced, fact-filled look at the underside of our production and consumption patterns. The Story of Stuff exposes the connections between a huge number of environmental and social issues, and calls us together to create a more sustainable and just world. It'll teach you something, it'll make you laugh, and it just may change the way you look at all the stuff in your life forever.


Another Way
http://www.storyofstuff.com/anotherway.html

Many people who have seen The Story of Stuff have asked what they can do to address the problems identified in the film.

Each of us can promote sustainability and justice at multiple levels: as an individual, as a teacher or parent, a community member, a national citizen, and as a global citizen. As Annie says in the film, “the good thing about such an all pervasive problem is that there are so many points of intervention.” That means that there are lots and lots of places to plug in, to get involved, and to make a difference. There is no single simple thing to do, because the set of problems we’re addressing just isn’t simple. But everyone can make a difference, but the bigger your action the bigger the difference you’ll make. Here are some ideas:

10 Little and Big Things You Can Do

1. Power down! A great deal of the resources we use and the waste we create is in the energy we consume. Look for opportunities in your life to significantly reduce energy use: drive less, fly less, turn off lights, buy local seasonal food (food takes energy to grow, package, store and transport), wear a sweater instead of turning up the heat, use a clothesline instead of a dryer, vacation closer to home, buy used or borrow things before buying new, recycle. All these things save energy and save you money. And, if you can switch to alternative energy by supporting a company that sells green energy to the grid or by installing solar panels on your home, bravo!
   
   
2. Waste less. Per capita waste production in the U.S. just keeps growing. There are hundreds of opportunities each day to nurture a Zero Waste culture in your home, school, workplace, church, community. This takes developing new habits which soon become second nature. Use both sides of the paper, carry your own mugs and shopping bags, get printer cartridges refilled instead of replaced, compost food scraps, avoid bottled water and other over packaged products, upgrade computers rather than buying new ones, repair and mend rather than replace….the list is endless! The more we visibly engage in re-use over wasting, the more we cultivate a new cultural norm, or actually, reclaim an old one!
   
   
3. Talk to everyone about these issues. At school, your neighbors, in line at the supermarket, on the bus…A student once asked Cesar Chavez how he organized. He said, “First, I talk to one person. Then I talk to another person.” “No,” said the student, “how do you organize?” Chavez answered, “First I talk to one person. Then I talk to another person.” You get the point. Talking about these issues raises awareness, builds community and can inspire others to action.
   
   
4. Make Your Voice Heard. Write letters to the editor and submit articles to local press. In the last two years, and especially with Al Gore winning the Nobel Peace Prize, the media has been forced to write about Climate Change. As individuals, we can influence the media to better represent other important issues as well. Letters to the editor are a great way to help newspaper readers make connections they might not make without your help. Also local papers are often willing to print book and film reviews, interviews and articles by community members. Let’s get the issues we care about in the news.
   
   
5. DeTox your body, DeTox your home, and DeTox the Economy. Many of today’s consumer products – from children’s pajamas to lipstick – contain toxic chemical additives that simply aren’t necessary. Research online (for example, http://www.cosmeticsdatabase.com/) before you buy to be sure you’re not inadvertently introducing toxics into your home and body. Then tell your friends about toxics in consumer products. Together, ask the businesses why they’re using toxic chemicals without any warning labels. And ask your elected officials why they are permitting this practice. The European Union has adopted strong policies that require toxics to be removed from many products. So, while our electronic gadgets and cosmetics have toxics in them, people in Europe can buy the same things toxics-free. Let’s demand the same thing here. Getting the toxics out of production at the source is the best way to ensure they don’t get into any home and body.
   
   
6. Unplug (the TV and internet) and Plug In (the community). The average person in the U.S. watches T.V. over 4 hours a day. Four hours per day filled with messages about stuff we should buy. That is four hours a day that could be spent with family, friends and in our community. On-line activism is a good start, but spending time in face-to-face civic or community activities strengthens the community and many studies show that a stronger community is a source of social and logistical support, greater security and happiness. A strong community is also critical to having a strong, active democracy.
   
   
7. Park your car and walk…and when necessary MARCH! Car-centric land use policies and life styles lead to more greenhouse gas emissions, fossil fuel extraction, conversion of agricultural and wildlands to roads and parking lots. Driving less and walking more is good for the climate, the planet, your health, and your wallet. But sometimes we don’t have an option to leave the car home because of inadequate bike lanes or public transportation options. Then, we may need to march, to join with others to demand sustainable transportation options. Throughout U.S. history, peaceful non-violent marches have played a powerful role in raising awareness about issues, mobilizing people, and sending messages to decision makers.
   
   
8. Change your lightbulbs…and then, change your paradigm. Changing lightbulbs is quick and easy. Energy efficient lightbulbs use 75% less energy and last 10 times longer than conventional ones. That’s a no-brainer. But changing lightbulbs is just tinkering at the margins of a fundamentally flawed system unless we also change our paradigm. A paradigm is a collection of assumptions, concepts, beliefs and values that together make up a community’s way of viewing reality. Our current paradigm dictates that more stuff is better, that infinite economic growth is desirable and possible, and that pollution is the price of progress. To really turn things around, we need to nurture a different paradigm based on the values of sustainability, justice, health, and community.
   
   
9. Recycle your trash…and, recycle your elected officials. Recycling saves energy and reduces both waste and the pressure to harvest and mine new stuff. Unfortunately, many cities still don’t have adequate recycling systems in place. In that case you can usually find some recycling options in the phone book to start recycling while you’re pressuring your local government to support recycling city-wide. Also, many products – for example, most electronics - are designed not to be recycled or contain toxics so recycling is hazardous. In these cases, we need to lobby government to prohibit toxics in consumer products and to enact Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) laws, as is happening in Europe. EPR is a policy which holds producers responsible for the entire lifecycle of their products, so that electronics company who use toxics in their products, have to take them back. That is a great incentive for them to get the toxics out!
   
   
10. Buy Green, Buy Fair, Buy Local, Buy Used, and most importantly, Buy Less. Shopping is not the solution to the environmental problems we currently face because the real changes we need just aren’t for sale in even the greenest shop. But, when we do shop, we should ensure our dollars support businesses that protect the environment and worker rights. Look beyond vague claims on packages like “all natural” to find hard facts. Is it organic? Is it free of super-toxic PVC plastic? When you can, buy local products from local stores, which keeps more of our hard earned money in the community. Buying used items keeps them out of the trash and avoids the upstream waste created during extraction and production. But, buying less may be the best option of all. Less pollution. Less Waste. Less time working to pay for the stuff. Sometimes, less really is more.

Invest in renewable power, N.B. told by Dr Edwards

Nuclear critic tells province to avoid spending billions on nuclear power; alternate energy sources are cheaper and safer

BY ALAN COCHRANE
TIMES & TRANSCRIPT STAFF

Published Monday February 25th, 2008
Appeared on page A1

New Brunswick should invest its money in alternative and renewable sources of electricity, rather than spend billions of dollars on nuclear power plants that provide short-term benefits and long-term problems, nuclear critic Dr. Gordon Edwards says.

"Instead of jumping into the carbon frying pan into the nuclear fire, we need to find alternative sources of energy," Edwards said following an hour-long presentation at Mount Allison University in Sackville. He said countries like Germany are embracing wind and solar power, which is becoming progressively cheaper to set up and much safer for the environment and the people around it than nuclear power.

"The question New Brunswickers need to ask themselves is whether they want to be a launching pad for the spread of more nuclear technology around the world."

New Brunswick is currently preparing to refurbish the existing nuclear generating station at Point Lepreau and considering the construction of a second reactor nearby. This comes amid reports that New Brunswick's demand for electricity is actually declining and the province has the capability to import cheaper electricity from neighbouring jurisdictions.

Edwards, president of the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility, has fought for transparency and accountability from Canada's nuclear industry. He has acted as a consultant to many government organizations, such as the Auditor General of Canada and the Ontario Royal
Commission on Electric Power Planning.

In his presentation, Edwards traced the history of uranium, radioactivity and the serious health risks associated with an element he believes should be left in the ground where it can't hurt anybody.

Uranium is a natural element that remains dormant underground. The problems occur when it is brought to the surface.

He said exploration and testing for uranium, which has been proposed for areas around the Turtle Creek watershed area -- home of Metro Moncton's water supply -- is too dangerous to comprehend. So far, local councils have rejected the idea of exploring for uranium.

He said drilling and testing creates small holes in the rock which act as "chimneys for the radon gas to escape" and allow contamination to spread into the water supply.

"It's difficult to assess and track, but it is definitely bad news."

Bringing uranium to the surface through mining operations can release dust particles that can be lethal even in tiny quantities. Uranium goes through many changes into many more lethal types of radioactive particles that can invade the human body, mutate cells and cause all sorts of damage. Uranium mines in Ontario have large deposits of waste materials that will remain toxic for hundreds of thousands of years.

He pointed to a modern artificial lake in Saskatchewan equipped with pumping stations that was built to house waste material from uranium mines.

"It's an ingenious plan, but is it going to last for 800,000 years?"

Waste rock from uranium mines is often dumped and reclaimed for use as building materials like stone and concrete, resulting in new homes being constructed of radioactive material.

He said nuclear generating stations routinely emit radioactive materials and are powered by small uranium pellets enclosed in metal bundles which generate heat.

"You can get the energy out of the pellet if you accept the responsibility of looking after it for the next million years."

After the pellets are spent, they must be cooled for several years before they can be stored, but they continue to generate heat and radioactivity for many years after that.

In the long run, he said, nuclear energy is just a flash in the pan. It will take billions of dollars to construct and set up a generating station that will last maybe 30 years, and take billions more to shut down when its lifespan is over.

Then there is the issue of nuclear weapons. For many years, much of the uranium mined in Canada went to the United States for use in making weapons. Edwards said former Prime Minister Lester Pearson outlawed that in the 1960s, but uranium still finds its way into weapons. And if uranium continues to be mined for use in electrical generating plants, at least some of it will continue to be funneled into weapons. This continues to feed what he calls the "hypocritcal double standard" that some countries like the U.S. and Britain are allowed to have nuclear weapons while others are not, and they would use those weapons to prevent other countries from making their own.

He believes that if New Brunswick allows another nuclear generating plant to be established in this province, it would act as a springboard for the technology to be used in other parts of the world.

Edwards'speaking tour was sponsored by the New Brunswick Conservation Council and various university groups.

Approve the Zenn Car in Canada

Approve the Zenn Car in Canada

A group to push the Canadian Government to allow the Zenn Car to be used on Canadian streets.

Contact Info
circuitboy84@hotmail.com
http://www.zenncars.com/
85 Scarsdale Road Suite 100
Toronto, ON


Recent News


PLEASE WRITE YOUR PROVINCIAL MPP.DEMAND CHANGE.

Hello all,The future of the electric car is up to us! If you are tired of paying ridiculous prices for oil, THE TIME TO ACT IS NOW!Please copy and paste the letter below with your name and send it to the 2 emails below. The first one is: Jim Bradley the Minister of Transportation of Ontario, and the second one is to: Matthew Coons, Senior Regulatory DevelopmentEngineer, Road Safety and Motor Vehicle Regulation

Please!!!!!!!!!! Take 2 minutes to do this. If you don’t send this email out then you are basically saying THAT YOU LIKE PAYING $1.15 ++++++ PER LITER OF GAS.


jbradley.mpp@liberal.ola.orgcoonsm@tc.gc.ca


To whom it may concern,my name is (YOUR NAME) and I am a very concerned Canadian. We hear every day about how our environment is being impacted by carbon emissions. Most of the emissions emitted into the atmosphere are due to the burning and consumption of fuels for our vehicles. The future of travel and commuting has to be a clean energy, with little to zero emissions. The Zenn car is that answer.The Zenn car is a very big step towards eliminating our dependence on foreign oil. We must support the manufacture of this vehicle to cut emissions, lower our dependence on foreign goods, and to cut down on noise pollution. Not only is this vehicle a great choice by environmental standards, it is also a very good choice economically.

This vehicle is manufactured in Quebec; therefore any money spent would be pumped back into the Canadian economy. It makes very little sense for Transport Canada to ban the use of these vehicles. At this point in time Zenn is not highway legal, but if the manufacturer is fully supported by the Federal and Provincial Government, I see no reason why this vehicle cannot be capable of highway speeds.I ask you sir/madam to make this an important issue to be discussed with open minds in the near future. The future of clean driving is now, and it up to you to be sure it is has a future.

Thank you.Sincerely,(YOUR NAME)





In response to some people's comments about this car's limitations:

The problem is that the manufacturer doesn't have the money to invest in a car that can go on 400 series highways. If this car sells to enough people then hopefully it will be enough to give this car company a leg up to the big leagues.Secondly, more and more people are moving to large cities where gridlock and traffic is a daily problem. These people are the target market, not people in smaller cities or towns.

The people who will buy these cars are the same people who buy mopeds or people who use transit but would like a car to do groceries with etc. This car isn't a replacement for the cars that are currently on the road. The hope is one day this car company will have enough money to put a car on the road that WILL replace cars that are currently on the road.


--PLEASE CONTACT YOUR PROVINCIAL MINISTER OF TRANSPORTATION--

ONTARIO-
Jim Bradley, jbradley.mpp@liberal.ola.org

ALBERTA
Luke Ouellette, infras-trans.minister@gov.ab.ca

MANITOBA
Ron Lemieux, rlemieuxmla@mts.net

NEW BRUNSWICK
Denis Landry, denis.landry2@gnb.ca

NEWFOUNDLAND & LABRADOR
Dianne C Whalen, twminister@gov.nl.ca

NOVA SCOTIA
Murray K Scott, murrayscottmla@eastlink.ca

PEI
Ron MacKinley, rwmackinley@gov.pe.ca

QUEBEC
Julie Boulet, Boulet.J@parl.gc.ca

SASKATCHEWAN
Wayne Elhard, cypresshills.mla@sasktel.net

IICPH - better options for N.B. than Nuclear

New Brunswick’s aging Point Lepreau nuclear power station still needs major refurbishment following major upgrades that have already cost taxpayers $1.2 billion. Even so, AECL is pushing for a second nuclear plant in New Brunswick using a model that is still under development. IICPH believes that New Brunswickers need to look at better options, considering the Auditor-General’s reports and the revealed deficiencies at Chalk River. This beautiful province has good winds, plenty of sunshine and tidal bores. If the tax dollars available for building a new power plant were spent on renewable energy, New Brunswick could fairly quickly replace it with affordable, clean and reliable energy. A switch to renewables would take less time than the present scenario. They’re doing this in many countries in Europe. It makes no sense to waste more money on nuclear power.

The International Institute of Concern for Public Health maintains that the problem of nuclear waste is ultimately unsolvable. There is still no satisfactory solution for disposing of the nuclear waste already accumulated; our children and future generations continue to be at extreme risk, even after years of trial and error. We believe there is sufficient evidence of harm to say that the use of nuclear reactors for any reason does not pass the test of the Precautionary Principle. Decisions to approve energy technologies must be based on the Precautionary Principle. When human activity puts human health or the environment at risk, we must take the road of precaution, even if all of the causes and effects aren’t yet fully proven by science.

For more information go to the IICPH site at: http://www.iicph.org
Contact information: IICPH Toronto Office: PO Box 80523 RPO White Shields, 2300 Lawrence Ave. East, Toronto M1P 4Z5 URL:
Email: info@iicph.org Tel: (416) 786-6128

Officials must listen to concerns of those opposed to uranium mining

Following is as an excellent letter written by Kevin Newman of Hoyt, N.B. This area, like Southeast N.B., is being targeted by the uranium exploration companies. We need to write to all the newspapers, and often. And we have to make our voices heard in Fredericton. All those who are against any uranium activity in N.B., please stand up!!

By KELLY NEWMAN - For The Daily Gleaner, 28th November 2007

I do not support uranium mining. I am fundamentally opposed to it. It matters not where it is, for wherever it is, it should not be. The fact that it is being considered anywhere shows that society has been in a constant devolution since settlers came to this land and assumed false power over its stewards.

A ban on uranium mining is needed in New Brunswick. Actually, a world-wide moratorium is needed, but we should all start with our own backyards to clean things up.
I heard my community being offered up to be bought and sold on the stock market recently. But I am opposed to mining and most certainly opposed to uranium mining.

Does that really not matter? Does it matter not that none of us want it here?
What about we who choose to make a life instead of making money and a living? Why do we have no say in all of this? My great-grandfather warned of the politicians with silver tongues and golden promises. He surely would have included corporate reps had they been an entity then. I heard them wagging their tongues at a meeting about uranium mining. They answered nothing of importance and wasted our time.

We do not have the right to tear up and abuse the Earth as we do. Just because we can, doesn't mean we should. Did we not learn this as children? It is atrocious that our democratically elected government is selling out from under us our future and our children's right to life with clean air, water and earth. How can any part of the mining process be in the best interest of the people? Only those with investment or corporate connections think this to be good. And that is due to the money they will make. It is good for no living thing.

Premier Shawn Graham should not think for a moment that he speaks for me, my family, my community or any of our needs. He and his government and the Opposition think of profits, not people. Not one person I have spoken with is in favour of uranium mining coming to New Brunswick, yet they still pretend it is a positive thing.

The greedy, who are seeking more money, more power, more stuff see the Earth as a commodity, something one can own. But I do not, so how are we to agree on the importance of it existing in its natural way? And how do you not see how sacred the Earth is? We don't even know the difference between luxury and necessity anymore. How many acknowledge and appreciate the luxury of electricity anymore? We have been separated from our natural relations and place within this creation.

We are told to trust government and businesses with our lives, the Earth, the children and our sustenance. But how could they act in our best interests? They do not even know who we are. An Indian elder once said, "Only when the last tree has been felled, the last fish has been caught, and the last river poisoned, will man realize we cannot eat money."

Eat money? Not a chance. No one can. Stand up for what truly supports us, the Earth.

Kelly Newman lives in Hoyt, N.B.

For more articles, click on this source: http://www.minesandcommunities.org/Action/press1734.htm

Any hope for a pesticide ban in N.B.?

Pesticide foes hope for ban soon - December 14, 2007 - Canadaeast News Service

FREDERICTON - A coalition of organizations lobbying for a province-wide ban on the sale and use of pesticides says it feels the provincial government may make a move on the pesticide issue as early as the spring. However, the provincial Environment Department says that's not the case.

Representatives from environmental, health and labour organizations may have different focuses and issues, but they've joined forces when it comes to pesticides. "We have different mandates, different concerns," said Rosemary Boyle, senior manager of public issues with the New Brunswick division of the Canadian Cancer Society.

But the groups -- which also include the New Brunswick Conservation Counsel and the Lung Association of New Brunswick -- agree that there's no need for cosmetic pesticide use. Boyle said cosmetic pesticides are those used to maintain residential lawns and gardens, as well as golf courses, ball fields and public parks. The coalition isn't dealing with pesticides used in farming, for example. Such cosmetic pesticides, used only for esthetic purposes, have been linked in studies to various forms of cancer, Boyle said.

Liz Smith, environmental program co-ordinator with the lung association, said studies have also linked such pesticides with neurological conditions, such as Parkinson's.

People may not be thinking of law care with so much snow on the ground now but the coalition is pushing the message now in part because the legislature is sitting, said Sharon Flatt, vice-president of the conservation council. The time is right for such a push, she said, because the public is much more aware of the links between the environment and health concerns. Flatt said the cabinet ministers with whom they've met seem to recognize that extensive pesticide use now will translate into major health-care costs later on. "We'd like to see something come up at this (legislative) sitting," she said.

Smith said the coalition has been given an indication the province plans to address the issue soon. "The announcement should be in the spring," she said. However, a spokesman with the Environment Department said that's not true. There is no imminent announcement regarding any kind of province-wide ban on pesticides, said communications officer Mike Wesson.

Environment Minister Roland Hache said there are four departments -- environment, health, agriculture and local government -- looking at the issue of cosmetic pesticides. "What we are planning to do is have the public input into the cosmetic pesticides used in the province of New Brunswick," he said. "It is very difficult for me to answer that at this time," Hache said about whether the Liberals would announce a new policy in the spring. "We will take into consideration what the public is saying."

Boyle said the scientific testing hasn't definitely demonstrated that the pesticides cause those illnesses but then again, one can't exactly expose children to dangerous chemicals as part of an experiment to prove such causation.

"But we have lots of studies that are pointing to the damage," said Flatt. She said coalition members have met with provincial cabinet ministers, who seemed open to their concerns and even shared them.

Boyle said government must act quickly to prevent future damage even if the science hasn't caught up with the lobbying efforts yet. "We can't wait for definitive evidence," she said. "Ultimately, those products are designed to kill."

It does damage to human health in subtle, long-term ways," Smith said.
Read more about this issue at: http://www.nben.ca/aboutus/caucus/archived_caucuses/pesticides/index.htm

Would you say we're poor, uneducated or greedy??

There are three ways in which uranium mining companies can get into a region. The first one is that the people are so poor, they will take anything that will give them some employment. The second is that the people are so uneducated that they are not aware of the extreme negative impact of uranium mining and that they don't know how it will affect them, their land, water and air. The third is that the people are so greedy that they don't care how much environmental and health degradation takes place as long as they get their cut of the pie.

Where would you put the people of New Brunswick? Obviously these companies think we're one of the three or is it that they think our government is one of the three? hmmmm ......

DO YOU KNOW about URANIUM...in NEW BRUNSWICK????

Inform yourself now because it's our future and that of our children -

· Uranium is a highly dangerous and radioactive heavy metal
· Exploration and mining of uranium releases these radioactive substances into the air, water and soil over long distances. These substances include, among many others, radium, radon gas, and polonium-210
· Prospecting for uranium is being conducted in areas between Sussex and Moncton. Including land that borders Turtle creek, the drinking water supply for 100,000 of Moncton, Riverview and Dieppe residents.
· Mineral exploration and prospecting on “PRIVATE PROPERTY” have taken place near Moncton, on the Ammon and Irishtown Rds and surrounding areas.
· Prospectors have been offering “water testing” to residents of the Ammon Rd., as a ploy to determine minerals in the land.

· Uranium exploration and mining is banned in British Columbia.

ASK your MLA:
1. Why there are no limits on Uranium and mineral exploration in our drinking water supply?
2. Why New Brunswickers health is not being considered in permitting uranium exploration?
3. Why there are few limits on uranium and mineral exploration close to people’s homes, in rural areas and even in towns and cities?
· Phone: Rt.Hon. Shawn Graham (506) 523-7980
Hon. Mike Murphy 869-6115 (Minister of Health)
Hon. Wally Stiles 756-3137
John Betts 869-6579
Chris Collins 856- 2595
Bruce Fitch 869-6117
Cy Leblanc 869-6580
Wayne Steeves 856-3006
Joan MacAlpine-Stiles 869-6360
Bernard Leblanc 758-9293
Claude Williams 525-4025
OR: Email: premier@gnb.ca
MLA emails: Firstname.familyname@gnb.ca
Example: Claude.Williams@gnb.ca



· DID YOU KNOW -Excerpts from the Mining Act of New Brunswick

· “Most minerals, as defined under the Mining Act, are owned by the Crown.”
· “Crown owned minerals are property separate from the soil; that is, a landowner owns the surface rights out does not own minerals”
· “The Province makes Crown owned minerals available for exploration and development.”- on “private” or Crown lands, by anyone holding a prospectors license
· A prospecting license may be issued to “a person who is at least 16 years old, to a company, or to a registered partnership.”

****According to the U.S Surgeon General, Radon released in massive quantities into the air and dissolved in surface waters, is the SECOND LEADING CAUSE OF LUNG CANCER in the U.S.

HOW LONG CAN YOU HOLD YOUR BREATH?

speech by Ralph Pritchard based on info from Ten Billion Acres http://10ba.org/?gclid=CI22tta86ZACFQSOFQoddl0UWQ

In just 300 years there has been a 25% reduction in the amount of oxygen in our atmosphere, for a total reduction of 33% since Christopher Columbus discovered America some 500 years ago. The amount of Carbon Dioxide (CO2) has quadrupled. Yes, emissions from burning fossil fuel accounts for a portion of it, but a very small one at that.
There are 100 billion reasons for this reduction…deforestation! In the mere span of 500 years we have cut down over 54% of the world’s oxygen-producing, carbon dioxide-consuming miracles. Over 10 billion acres worth!
Right now as I speak, the atmosphere is storing heat, and CO2, losing oxygen and ozone and humanity is suffering - less oxygen leads to more disease, and eventual extinction. Do you need to wonder why cancer rates are up, emphysema in non-smokers, asthma? Did we recently set records for high temperatures in January?
Since almost everyone on the planet learned in school that trees and plants convert carbon dioxide into oxygen through photosynthesis, why is it so difficult to believe that deforestation on a global scale would have such impact? I am not here to discuss the psychology of economics, greed, or even ignorance. I am only here to share the facts as they have been researched and to encourage each and everyone of you to take “some” action. If we don’t, scientists predict that within 100 years we will lose up to 90% of the world’s population of oxygen breathing mammals and guess what, that means our children and grandchildren.
Let’s take a trip back to 1492 when Columbus sailed the blue (not green) ocean and landed in what was first believed to be America. At that time nearly 18.5 Billion Acres of Forests covered Planet Earth, yet, the total human population of Earth was only about a half billion. Today, there are in excess of six billion human beings: but there are far fewer trees, 100 billion more or less. Only 8.5 Billion Acres of Forests remain in the world today scrubbing and cleaning the carbon dioxide and producing oxygen. By the way, did I tell you that the amount of Carbon Dioxide in the atmosphere has quadrupled in the last 500 years and also as I speak, is rising at an unprecedented rate. Is it any wonder that our atmosphere has changed?
A question to get you thinking if I may…if we started planting right now, how long would it take to replenish the 33% reduction of oxygen in the atmosphere?
Let’s go back again to 1492: At that time, 66% of all the oxygen in our atmosphere came from trees and 33% from algae, now it is reverse. At that time, the planet could process 100% more Carbon Dioxide (CO2) per year then it can now. Ecologically our atmosphere has regressed to where the planet was some 1 million years ago when the oceans were green with algae and only a handful of trees and mammals were alive.
A disruption of the balance of trees and plants versus algae, has caused, among other things, a high nitrogen overload content to fall in rainstorms, leading to so-called "Acid Rains" that damage plants and human activity.
At the each earth’s poles, the Sun's heat is being deflected off the upper atmosphere by higher concentrations of CO2. This causes lower temperatures right at the Poles which draws the over-heated 85% balance of the ocean to the Poles to cool them. When the northern currents chill, it leads to a not quite as severe, yet no less dangerous "The Day After Tomorrow" (2004 - Roland Emmerich) like effect: increasing snow amounts in the northern areas during Winter, pockets of extreme snow, and increased atmospheric turbulence towards the middle regions in the Spring and Summer, and a worsened Hurricane / Typhoon Season and warmer middle states weather, depleted water in drought prone areas and so forth. This has the bad side effect of creating worse periods of collateral storm systems, raising higher summer temperatures, causing much more coastal flooding damages and more beach erosion.
As a result, far more rain occurs in some areas, causing land flooding and river overflow flooding, while barometric effects cause wind change, shifts to the Jet Stream, and other major air flows. That change has potentially catastrophic impact on current Farming zones, the earth's food producing centers. Increased arid dryness and drought drastically and unexpectedly in various parts of the world, could lead to "dustbowl" syndrome in areas ordinarily the source of the world's foods. When Solar Flare cycles peak and heat the middle of our atmosphere towards the equator, deadly more violent storms such as Hurricane Katrina and beyond will happen.
With human population on the rise, Humanity is on a near term collision path with the decline in the number of Trees. Even the renewing of existing trees in the spring is not happening at the levels it used to anymore due to nutrient pollution such as the release of sewage effluent and run-off from lawn fertilizers into natural waters (rivers or coasts) and acid rain all leading to eventual human extinction if left unchecked.
The threat to Human Survival will hit home far, far sooner than mere global warming, over population or pollution of the environment, however it will steadily worsen the climate changes. The lack of Trees (and plants) to "scrub" CO2 from the Atmosphere is also creating a "greenhouse gas canopy" (G2C) in the upper atmosphere, causing heat to be retained by the atmosphere, leading to climate change in a variety of ways which has been so eloquently elaborated on by Al Gore in his movie, An Inconvenient Truth. Adding to the complex problem specifically is the clearing of rainforests, over 20% of these crucial rainforest areas are now gone. These dense zones of Trees and Plants are in constant danger from the spread of civilization and industry. When I say dense, I am talking about thousands of trees and plants per acre compared to perhaps hundreds in our forests.
So how much oxygen is left? The atmosphere contains about 1.3 x 10(to the power of 14) tons today vs. 2.0 x 10(to the power of 14) 500 years ago. You also have to realize that in the atmosphere strong ionizing cosmic radiation causes the production of ozone and atomic oxygen within the stratosphere. The ozone layer protects the biosphere effectively from short-wave UV-radiation. All of the remaining oxygen in the atmosphere means absolutely nothing if we can’t get it into our lungs in the proper ratio.
If we do nothing to increase the number of forests and trees within 50 years, by then it will be too late to do anything about. It will be like a runaway train with no brakes, since tree growth and fundamental reforestation in nature without our help could take hundreds of years. Once oxygen drops below the critical level, humanity will simply start dying off until the ratio of trees to humans (T2H2A) to Algae balances off. We have to equalize the ratios (called: the Perfect Climate) to achieve proper ratios, which would also have the secondary effect of reducing the impact of Industrial Carbon / CO2 to a manageable one.
If the citizens of this planet could aggressively rally to reforest the lost 10 billion acres iin the next 50 years, the earth's atmosphere would be vastly improved, with 33% higher oxygen and reduction in CO2 and CO by 85%. Simultaneously, the Oceans would also improve, with reduction in CO2 and acidity that is greatly imperiling Ocean Coral Reefs, plant life and sea creatures of all kind. Such would more than quintuple the success rate of Ocean based fish reproduction, creating larger volumes of edible fish than existed at the time of Christopher Columbus, a boon for solving the Human Hunger problems.
This can only be done using a "planting factor" of about 100 to 294 trees to an acre…and we need to plant trees in an area the size of Africa. To give you a better idea of what I am talking about, check out how many country’s land masses would fit into Africa.
Saving the world starts…saving humanity…starts right in this very room:
1. Get the word out. Tell everyone you know

2. Form a coalition. It will take the concerted effort of all humans. People, business, science and government need to ally to solve this.

3. Effect Change. Start with your own yard, join planting groups, contact the Forestry Department, write Ottawa.

4. Monitor and Guide. Join an association that monitors this and stay involved to do your part.

5. Adjust and Compensate for Errors Made. Understand that there are a vast array of problems and priorities. Don’t become a vigilanty. Use gentle persuasion.
So…Let me ask you another question…would you mind if I reduced the amount of oxygen in this room in order to save money and even to perhaps to give it to some new members of my growing family? Hmmm, I didn’t think that would go over so well.