wongrs

I've signed the petition and recently viewed some of Alex's videos. Pretty scary stuff with the sea lice. I've committed to not eating farmed atlantic salmon due to those videos combined with the SeaChoice reference card. Thanks for raising the issue!

I saw Simon last year and his demo was INCREDIBLE. Regular day at the office for him though.

This is the whole point to have fair trade labels. It identifies which companies treat their labour fairly from both economic and social perspectives. If something was not labeled fair trade, then the buyer wouldn't know if they were buying from the responsible or the plunderer unless you did a lot of homework. It helps those out who are interested to buy goods made responsibly rather than exploiting the labour.

A product that is certified as "Fair Trade" means that a minimum amount of money is paid to the workers who've made that product. In the case of coffee bean or cocoa bean farmers, that means that they get a fair consistent price for their product rather than depending on the world market fluctuations. Same goes for cotton or any artisan products. Canadian beef and pork farmers can relate as their livelihoods are also tied to spot market prices. Fair trade creates a market for goods that are made using environmentally and socially responsible practices. There is a market demand for fair trade which is why you are seeing it more often. It's a personal choice and it's not for everybody. Either you like supporting people who are in a worse spot than you or you don't. Some people care about how the workers were treated to make the goods that they are buying and some people don't. Labeling people who are trying to help out those less fortunate as an 'eco-weenie' is something I don't understand. Would you put the label 'eco-weenie' on someone who donates money to cancer charities or is involved in a streamside weed pull? There are lots of resources out there to learn about fair trade. Just have to ask google.

here's an idea. take a page out of the greenpeace or david suzuki foundation handbook and put together some campaign-styled advocacy. these organizations, while you may not agree with all of their views, are effective at producing easy-to-understand educational materials. they are also effective at influencing various stakeholders such as industry, government and the public. a letter writing campaign can be effective if there is a common message among the letters. if everyone on this forum wrote their own letter with their own suggestions, what would Ted Morton do with all the suggestions? in my opinion, it would be more beneficial to get buy-in from differing stakeholders and put forth recommendations that are supported by all. i also suggest that any campaign be targeted at the public as well. education may help to curb poor behaviour. a big enough stink will make the evening news and you will be speaking to thousands of albertans who share this resource. my suggestions: 1) document the problem with pictures, reports and whatever data is available to illustrate the problem visually (i.e. on a website) 2) consult professionals in the industry (i.e. Harps, Stelfox and others) 3) consult other stakeholders (ATVers, trout unlimited, forestry sector, government personnel, other fishing groups) mentioned by pipestoneflyguy as having common interests to this group 4) propose regulatory changes that satisfy all stakeholders 5) present results to media or SRD another good idea would be to head down there and film some nasty stuff, produce it professionally and put it on youtube (and send to media). approaching various media outlets to do a story on the area would also help throughout the process. flushing out ideas here is a good start and it happens every year but fizzles out. i think you need to get consensus on what the problem is, regulatory changes on how to alleviate said problem, and outreach to the broader public and other stakeholders who don't understand what said problem is and who wouldn't normally care about it. there are many professionals on this forum who have the ability to put together a substantial outreach campaign. putting together these efforts would produce more than a simple letter writing campaign. i bet you could get some good input if you called up an enviro org and asked for their opinion on some ideas. 2 cents worth from an accused 'eco-weenie'. while i don't live in ab any more, i still care about the condition of the area.

as someone said, i bought a new bottle but i diluted my thick bottle with some new thinner stuff from the newer bottle. when it's fresh, it's not thick enough for me as i need an excessive number of coats to make flies such as buzzers.

i haven't read any of the previous 2 pages, but to me that picture looks more like a llama than a horse. perhaps even a kangaroo. my 2 cents. carry on.

i just watched a fairly candid interview on cnn with palin post-election. it was refreshing to hear her speak honestly and openly instead of trying to use the word 'maverick' in every sentence. she was surprisingly down to earth and believable. she was probably being pressured by the rnc to put forth a certain image that just wasn't her and came across as fake to me.

Sorry, I've been traveling for work and was not able to reply in a timely fashion. Perhaps it's not even worthwhile posting a reply at this stage but I thought I'd try to clarify some of my statements anyways. Rick, I entirely agree with your statements. I don't believe she is not intelligent and I should apologize for my vague comments earlier. When I use comments such as 'stupidity' and 'moron' in a colloquial setting, it refers to lots of things that are socially bad and I did not intend the comment to be taken literally to mean that she has a low IQ. I agree with you that she can't be entirely stupid and be a governor of a US state. I'll even admit that even George Bush Jr. is likely more intelligent than people give him credit for. Orvis, clearly I've written something that you have taken exception to and I apologize for that..You probably don't realize it but I agree with you statements to some degree (although a small degree). I agree with you that various sources of information (newspapers, tv, radio, internet collectively known as 'the media') have inherent biases. I believe these are based on the personal beliefs/values of individual reporters rather than an over-arching goal of the media organization controlling the message getting out. Regarding Palin, I still believe that she is not suited to be the VP or P of any country at this stage. I've watched dozens of interviews from different media and the vice-presidential debate. I believe she was chosen for entirely political purposes to woo the dejected Clinton voters. She hasn't said a single thing yet that I would consider to be a credible concrete thought that belongs to her. That's my interpretation of all interviews but I realize it might be for different reasons such as she's being intensely coached by the republican party to say certain things like 'maverick' or whatever. And I realize that she hasn't been on the national stage before and is new to it and national issues. Personally, I find that she's not trustworthy and all of her answers are shifty and vague. Hopefully this clears up my comments. I'm curious to know more about where the mistrust for 'the media' comes from. An idea for another thread.

thanks.

if i am understanding you correctly, there is no way to receive information on facts or events from any kind of media because it is inherently spun. is that correct? i go back to my previous point, if somebody is asked a question and they open their mouth and total stupidity comes flying out of there (uninterrupted), then yes, i believe that person is a moron. hey orvis, do you support palin? are you offended that i'm slamming palin because if so, i can stop.

i'm basing my opinion on palin based entirely on the full interviews she has given. if someone talks like a moron, then guess what, i think they are a moron. claiming that they are portrayed as a moron because the media is liberal-biased is way too easy of a cop-out. i haven't seen much republican support of palin either. is that a coincidence?

By this definition, the federal conservatives would be liberals. Have they not spend a bajillion dollars in the past 2 years? They blasted through the 13Billion dollar surplus and have also spent a lot of money. Curious to know where alternatives to Alberta are for oil/gas extraction. where else is the capital investment safer than Alberta? How to royalties/taxes compare?

CBC radio has mentioned through their hosts and their guest speakers that the US democrats are 'further right' than Canadian conservatives several times over the past few weeks that I've heard. Also, why wouldn't 'Canadian Liberals' be happy that a democrat was elected? It's either got to be a republican or a democrat so it's the better of the 2 options from their perspective. Seems logical to me but then again, not everybody values logic. Really, I think everyone should be relieved that Palin isn't in a position to be president. Her in control is scary. She can talk up a useless verbal storm though if we ever need that skill.

BUUUUURRRNN! nice one. even though for hockey this season i really only care whether detroit goes on a huge losing streak. thanks for the info.