It's Not Hockey---But We Should Still Care

[torco]

I didn't vote them but no one should be surprised when they were a minority government they attacked the Navigable Waterways Protection Act, unfortunately with their majority position and ability to manipulate the spin, look no further than the robocalls scandal and how they turned that on the Liberal MP from my riding. I am not excusing what he did as not being wrong and he should be punished for breaking the rules but to compare sending out an anonymous message re-iterating your opponents very public view on abortion vs. redirecting voters to fake polling stations are mountains apart.

 

 

Its a tough slog to stop them from doing anything with that majority but I am all for giving it a try.

[muskymatt]

I bet this thread get less replies the the NHL threads..... sad really... but a truism of our sad state of affairs... I am waiting for muskymike to spew Senators all over this....

 

 

seriously though, the puck bunnies aside...

 

 

this thread deserves more attention then the over paid cry babies many on this board seem to drool over....

 

G.

 

Well, well

Gerritt has some input, even though it has nothing to do with the topic!

No input either subjective or objective, no positive contribution to the topic, which is not hockey, but as a Sens fan I'm smart enough to differentiate.

Nope, nada, just insults and jabs, can't say I'm surprised though.

Back on topic, if anyone is not concerned with Harpers direction with laws protecting the environment, you should be!

This will ultimately open the door for future assaults on not only the environment but the rights of anglerd and hunters as well.

Up until now Canada has been a global leader in environmental protection, but in Harpers endless pursuit of cuddling up to American politics and dollars, it will change.

[bushart]

You got that right.

 

I left school a green-eyed, pseudo tree hugger and landed a job in Air Quality in Fort Mac. Within 6 months, the green in my eyes was not for the environment. It was a stunning reality check overall.... it's very tough to be a defender of the environment, especially when facing people who rely on pollution to earn a living.

 

This does not excuse a government with very little creativity, however; they should be setting the example, not trying to cheat and lie and sneak things past us.

Maybe we should have voted for Stephan Dion and his "green Plan" haha, Boy, did that ever tank the Libs.

 

 

I don't know how to answer this??

 

 

Everybody knows we need oil currently----but it took Dr. David Schindler from the U of Alta to prove that letting the oil industry monitor itself is a bad idea

 

there was an untruth floating around that pollutants in the Athabsca river were naturally occuring---till Dr. Schindler proved them wrong----now suddenly there's 3rd party monitoring and then environment minister John Baird had to eat some crow.

 

You see they will not install whatever pollution controls needed to stop what's ending up in that river and poisoning the lives downstream and that huge lake.

[bushart]

Uhh---I'm not a mod guys---just tryin to not get this important topic into lockdown

 

sooo--if we can not jab shots may be cool

[Rod Caster]

http://www.wbea.org/

 

This is who I worked for. Lots of good reading, data reviewing, projects to go through here.

 

WBEA are basically an "independant" group that is funded by governement, industry and other local groups. They monitored the area quite thoroughly in my opinion, within their mandate.

The problem is, you can have 1000 pages of PROOF of contamination and the government has little to no resources, power, want, historical supporting data or public support to do anything about it. There are 1000 other pages that will contradict the proof...lobyists, sceptics, bad science, good science... and as soon as the governement jumps in, usually late, people say "oh, they are doing it wrong and wasting taxpayer money". And the hamster runs, and the hamster runs.

 

There's no clear direction when it comes to the environmental direction in Canada. We should be looking to California for ideas...we are at least 20 years behind the US in terms of research, legislation, green industry etc... not all of the US, of course, but overall we are way behind and this leaves a lot of room for decisions based on bad/no science.

 

I'm sure this is an incomplete thought.... but i'm not writing an essay here.

[bushart]

All valid points RC

 

I believe what the final nail was-----pollutants do not naturally occur on top of snow

 

and levels they found within a 50 km radius of the oilsands was equivelant to an oil tanker wreck spewing into the Athabaca river during runoff

 

I look at it this way---one would have to take the federal Cons---the Alta Cons and the oil industry kicking and screaming into that 3rd party monitoring if they could prove it naturally occuring

 

thus the change IMO

[jedimaster]

SOunds to me like it will be easier to build a dock or alter the shoreline. Some of the rules in place are stupid beyond a doubt. Just try getting a permit to put down some stones to protect a shoreline from eroding.

[Guest ThisPlaceSucks]

wow. you'd think as an angler you'd be concerned about protecting fish habitat, considering that it is to blame for so many fisheries collapses.

this guy is an irresponsible jerk and i'd be ashamed if i voted for him.

 

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Harper+government+laws+protecting+fish+habitat+biologist+claims/6295564/story.html

[Guest ThisPlaceSucks]

Is there anyone here willing to make a stand!! They know were all a bunch of SHEEP. We keep taking it.

 

you're assuming we all sit and complain on the computer but you assume wrong.

beyond the power of my vote, i'm also involved politically. i'm also getting mighty sick of seeing this lunatic run our country's nose into the ground. i was for the removal of LG registry, but every thing else this guy does is an affront to what i believe it is to be canadian. i promise you, i won't put up with it.

[bushart]

Pretty well every paper in the country is carrying this today from coast to coast

 

consensus also is saying that they're going to attach this bill along with the budget--to cloak it

 

I guess I should just always expect the worst and then I'm never surprised

[Toronto_Angler]

If you voted for 'em, don't complain! This aspect - and others - of the current regime were pointed out about them at elections time again and again, so it should come as no surprise. That's not all they're up to either!

 

p.-

 

Umm..that's like saying if your boss hires you he's not allowed to complain or tell you what you're doing is wrong..As a voter and taxpayer Im allowed to have input into how my country is run thank-you very much.

[Rod Caster]

Umm..that's like saying if your boss hires you he's not allowed to complain or tell you what you're doing is wrong..As a voter and taxpayer Im allowed to have input into how my country is run thank-you very much.

 

 

Can't have input on the things they keep hiding from us

 

Your right though.

[Guest ThisPlaceSucks]

i would rather someone who voted for them criticize them then defend them out of pride and stubbornness.

Edited March 14, 2012 by Dr. Salvelinus

[bushart]

Here's a timely Mercer Rant on this issue---maybe somebody can pop it up?

 

[jedimaster]

You can't have one without the other. The economy needs to be strong in order to provide the resources to protect the environment from the very thing that goes to help raise funds.

There are ways to protect yet allow development. Certain pieces of legislation are so outdated that they in fact block things from happening that would actually help... case in point allowing sand bags in streams to divert water or fish from being stuck in damns.

 

Some streamlining is clearly needed to make improvements. Thats what a governments job is. To improve on what they have been given. Now weather or not this is an improvement is up to each person to decide. I am not entirely opposed to the idea of revamping the fisheries act. Do you know how many conversations like the following have occured "Logically you know that this would not only help the environment but provide a boost to the economy...Sorry sir its not allowed"

 

There are always agendas hidden on every side. I would suggest people go through the information before blindly passing judgement on something. Once you have feel free. Well feel free even if you are illinformed.

[bushart]

Well on that note--I have become informed

 

and once you do become informed is the point it gets scary

 

 

and Re: Criticizing politicians---good luck with that---you may be unhappy but they are given a 4-5 year lease to work their agenda

 

and all the complaining won't change that

 

Now votes----that tells them if your happy or dis-satisfied with their performance.

 

Me---I liken it to---ice fisherman going out on open ended ice on Simcoe and then asking why after the fact----maybe they should get informed on the possible results

 

so the same in the election---I got informed and voted the best way I thought---I may have lost

 

But my research is proving true.

[Guest ThisPlaceSucks]

 

I would suggest people go through the information before blindly passing judgement on something. Once you have feel free. Well feel free even if you are illinformed.

 

i would suggest you might benefit from following your own advice as I doubt you are more informed than myself. As cocky as that may sound, it was my profession for better part of the last decade.

 

instead of making vague and uninformative posts like this one, perhaps you could enlighten us as to what is out of date about the fisheries act other than it makes things difficult for an oil pipeline?

Edited March 14, 2012 by Dr. Salvelinus

[limeyangler]

This stuff is makin me sick guys

 

According to a Calgary paper a while ago they reported that---a non profit group called "Forest ethics" spoke up against the pipeline---one guy had to be fired because the gov't threatened to yank it's charitable status.

 

It seems--this ultra capitalistic greed agenda---if you question the plan---your an enemy to Canada.

 

I'm starting to not recognize the place anymore.

 

 

An american would recognise it....its the same Bull ideology of the neo-con GOP, deregulate everything, then when it goes kaboom, blame everyone else and tax us more, and if you protest call you unpatriotic and claim you weren't born there....so much for small government.

Edited March 14, 2012 by limeyangler

[bushart]

i would suggest you might benefit from following your own advice as I doubt you are more informed than myself. As cocky as that may sound, it was my profession for better part of the last decade.

 

 

See I knew that but did'nt want to talk for ya Doc

[bushart]

An american would recognise it....its the same Bull ideology of the neo-con GOP

 

 

Yeah Simon

 

I don't want to throw too many logs on the fire----but online one can find a speech Stevie gave to a group of US republicans before he became PM---he alluded to how he'd change Canada

 

Guess he was true to his word

 

Notice I did'nt even utter the words wheat board soon to be US Food Inc---that'll be yet another discussion

[jedimaster]

i would suggest you might benefit from following your own advice as I doubt you are more informed than myself. As cocky as that may sound, it was my profession for better part of the last decade.

 

instead of making vague and uninformative posts like this one, perhaps you could enlighten us as to what is out of date about the fisheries act other than it makes things difficult for an oil pipeline?

 

Did I suggest anything in my post that I was referring to you? I am fairly well informed of the fisheries act. So without the risk of sounding like an ignorant cocky like you, perhaps you should sit back and ponder at what the meaning behind the post was. That was for people to not just blindly trust what any media outlet gives on any pollitical issue as they all have anagenda. Good or bad there is always an agenda. Look up the information for yourself and base your judgement on that.

 

If you took that as a slight against you then perhaps you should bite your own toungue before making such a ridiculas comment like the one you made pointed at me.

[Guest ThisPlaceSucks]

so which OFC member was it a slight against considering we all think we are informed?

i don't bite my tongue often when i'm talking about something i am well educated on, and very passionate about.

Edited March 14, 2012 by Dr. Salvelinus

[Guest ThisPlaceSucks]

hey look, the conservatives are already planning what to do after they destroy our fisheries!

http://www.sootoday.com/content/news/details.asp?c=40102

[jedimaster]

so which OFC member was it a slight against considering we all think we are informed?

i don't bite my tongue often when i'm talking about something i am well educated on, and very passionate about.

 

It wasn't a slight against anyone just a reminder to make sure the facts are straight before condeming a majority goverment that is following through with what they promissed.

[bushart]

uhhh??--pretty sure they did'nt campaign on gutting the fisheries act to fast-track environmental assessment

 

I too make sure I'm involved and informed----up to and including the kudos paid to me by Dr> David Schindler on my oil sands art piece