Observing environmental organizations for decades, both from the inside and the outside has led me to one solid conclusion. There is a double standard when applying your beliefs to nature and the natural environment.
Most environmental groups in B.C. are centered in the lower southwest portion of the province and are at present focused on the central north and the Enbridge pipeline and their desire to stop this project while accepting an environmental disaster in that same southwestern part of the province because it is deemed environmental, hence the double standard.
There is an ecosystem of some 500,000 hectares of land designated "spotted owl" habitat which also is home to the barred and horned owls. The barred and horned owls are the most adaptable of the three species.
By being more adaptable their numbers have increased, they have expanded their range pushing the less adaptable spotted owl toward its natural extinction as nature intended, not man, not
logging, but the natural expansion of species. David Suzuki and the Suzuki Foundation were the prime advocates to "Save the Spotted Owl" from this natural event.
In 2007 "the Spotted Owl Recovery Program" was introduced as per the Study and Consequent Report which stated categorically that "for the program to be successful all barred and horned owls must be removed (killed) within those 500,000 hectares of land. Thousands of animals have been destroyed in the name of environmentalism.
Over the last few years a large number of young barred and horned owls have been brought to bird shelters in that area. They are not ready to fend for themselves allegedly because the adults were killed and the young left to die a slow death due to starvation.
All those so-called environmental organizations centered in the Lower Mainland where this
environmentally orchestrated destruction is occurring have never voiced any opposition to this senseless killing of wildlife. It appears if it is advocated by an environmentalist group and claim to be environmentally friendly, regardless of the destruction of the natural environment it is acceptable to all other organizations.
As of late the W.W.F. as well as professors at UNBC, have been weighing in on environmental concerns about wildlife and their habitat while refusing to acknowledge the destruction of the barred and horned owls because it is deemed environmentally friendly.
How do these individuals and the W.W.F. justify killing these species for doing exactly what nature intended them to do? How does an organization such as the W.W.F. that is supposedly dedicated to nature and wildlife on this planet accept the premise of destroying wildlife for doing what nature (not man) intended them to do?
Tell the world how this is considered green, environmentally friendly and saving the planet.
Larry Barnes
Prince George
