|
The New York State Senate is
poised to act on a groundbreaking measure aimed at protecting birds and wildlife
from the devastating impact of non-native or "invasive" species. The
term invasive species describes the set of harmful, non-native plants, animals,
and microorganisms found throughout the United States that are causing
widespread damage to bird and wildlife habitat and cause billions of dollars of
damage annually to crops, rangelands, and waterways. Many of
America's most imperiled birds are threatened by invasive species, including
more than one-third of the birds on Audubon's WatchList
Here in New York, invasive species
are severely threatening native species on several wildlife refuges, and many
Important Bird Areas throughout the state. And currently in Albany,
the State Senate is about to vote on a bill that could significantly
help! Bill number S.3522 calls for the creation of an invasive
species task force whose job it will be to monitor the impact of invasive
species and create plans to protect birds and wildlife at serious risk from the
impact of these non-native species. This is a very big and necessary
first step that will go a very long way in protect birds and wildlife throughout
our state!
As your
State Senator will cast a deciding vote on this measure, we're writing to you
today to ask that you please contact your Senator and urge that lawmaker to
support S.3522! Remember, the more our lawmakers hear from their
constituents, the better chance there is they will support this species-saving
measure! Click onto this link now for more information and to
identify and communicate with your State Senator on this issue today: http://www.capitolconnect.com/audubon/summary.asp?subject=218
ETC Group
Genotype
May 2, 2003
www.etcgroup.org
Nanotech and the Precautionary
Prince
Tiny tech's biggest woe may be anger management.
Public row over princely
cautions exposes nanotech's
not-so-small problem -
green goo:
Prince Charles'
concerns about the emerging revolution in nanotechnology (what ETC group prefers
to call Atomtechnology) have catapulted tabloid headlines about "grey goo" (and
impending doom) onto front pages around the world.(1) Industry fears that the
great GMO (genetically modified organisms) debate is about to go down to the
nanoscale inhabited by atoms and molecules. Despite being one of the
world's best-funded new technologies, nanotech is still little known or
understood outside scientific and business circles - and even less regulated by
governments. While grey goo makes great headlines, many are probably still
scratching their own grey goo wondering what the fuss is about.
The Precautionary Prince:
According to news reports, Prince Charles' concerns stem in part from his
reading of The Big Down, an ETC Group report on nanoscale technologies (see www.etcgroup.org for the
full text and related studies). Only four pages of the 80-page study discuss the
prospect of molecular manufacturing (which, if possible and allowed out of
control, could lead to the grey goo scenario). Jim Thomas of the ETC Group's UK
office explains,
"Although Prince Charles hasn't talked
with us, he did order several copies of The Big Down. It seems
reasonable to assume that he is aware of the full range of issues addressed in
the study. These include the health and environmental implications of
nanoparticle manufacture, the implications for national economies and
employment, the potential for technology monopolies as well as the future of
molecular self-assembly. In fact, these are the same issues we will be
discussing at a seminar in the European Parliament in Brussels on June 11th 2003
[see box below]." In so doing, the Prince is simply observing the precautionary
approach for environmental safety that has been recognised by governments
through the United Nations. News of the Prince's interest has galvanized
industry (and some scientists) to try to marginalise St. James' Palace by
arguing that the Prince's concerns are either non-existent, centuries distant,
or exist only in pulp fiction. But the virulent attacks against the Prince may
only be the latest of a series of technical and tactical mistakes made by
nanotech's over-eager proponents.
The first mistake: Prince Charles has grounds for caution.
Despite a quarter-century of lab work on nanoparticles, scientists worldwide
have failed to establish agreed laboratory protocols to safeguard workers.
Moreover, governments have allowed nanoparticles into consumer products in the
absence of regulatory mechanisms. Particles that have been approved for consumer
use at the micro or macro scale have not been re-tested when introduced into the
same products at the nanoscale. Indeed, some nano companies pooh-poohed the
notion that nanoparticles need to be evaluated for their health and
environmental impact - even though the quantum characteristics of elements in
the Periodic Table change radically and nanoparticles can run undetected past
immune systems and can even slip through the blood-brain barrier. Over the past
year, ETC Group has brought forward a series of reports showing that real risks
exist. (See, for example, "No Small Matter" and "Size Matters," www.etcgroup.org.)
Partly because of this research, a growing number of scientists are
acknowledging that nanoparticles could pose significant risks for the
environment and human health.
The second mistake: In an ill-conceived campaign to paint
critics - and now Prince Charles - as paranoid, industry has implied that
concerns about nanotech come from either Luddites or science fiction fans who
believe it is possible for scientists to construct nanoscale robots (nanobots).
Such nanobots would self-replicate and be capable of atom-by-atom construction
of everything from a Big Mac to a Mac Apple to the Big Apple. "The image is a
fanciful combination of invisible sci-fi robots stacking atoms mixed with the
Sorcerer's Apprentice," says Jim Thomas in Oxford. "This is hardly what we mean
by molecular self-assembly."
Green goo: "It's not grey goo but green goo that makes
molecular self-assembly worthy of serious study and plausible in the
not-too-distant-future," says Pat Mooney, ETC Group's Executive Director.
"Molecular self-assembly is what living materials do best. You don't need tiny
tin robots. Science is merging biotechnology and nanotechnology into
nanobiotechnology in order to fashion unique amino acids, proteins, molecules
and cells. These will be organized in new manufacturing processes that could
replace conventional machines and workers." ETC Group believes that rapid
developments in this field warrant concern.
Life matters: Through the nanoscale manipulation of
biological materials it is now possible (or scientists believe it soon will be
possible) to:
* Craft synthetic DNA from the blueprint
provided by a natural organism;
* Use the synthetic DNA
to create unique living organisms; (2)
* Construct new
artificial amino acids that can be built into unique proteins;
* Add a fifth letter to DNA (A, C, T, G and now "F") thus
increasing the potential diversity (or destructiveness) of life. (3)
* "Write" DNA code in much the same way programmers write
software;(4)
* Use DNA to build nano machines capable
of exponential self-assembly;
* Design exponentially
self-assembling nanomachines that can become motors, pistons, tweezers, etc. in
manufacturing processes.
Time
matters: While the prospects for molecular self-assembly as a major
manufacturing process remain hypothetical, it would be a dangerous mistake to
consider it unlikely or far-off. "Consider how the pace of scientific progress
is already impacting nanobiotechnology," Pat Mooney suggests. "In 1996, after
ten years, 1,000 scientists decoded the yeast genome. This year, a SARS genome
was decoded in eight days. At the outset of the Human Genome Project, it took
two months to sequence 150 nucleotides. Now we can sequence 11 million
nucleotides in a few hours," said Mooney. "In the last ten years," Jim Thomas
points out, "the number of screened drug candidates has increased by three
orders of magnitude from 500,000 compounds to 1.5 billion."
Anger management: As funding and
research in nanotech have grown dramatically in recent years, its proponents
have been warning one another that they dare not make the same mistakes the
agbiotech companies made when GM crops were introduced in the
mid-1990s. Yet, when critics of nanotech pointed out that industry
had introduced nanoscale particles into consumer products without adequate
testing for health and environmental impacts, the industry resorted to
diversionary tactics. The recent attacks on the Prince of Wales by nanotech
proponents are reminiscent of the worst blunders of biotech's boosters. By
characterizing all legitimate concerns as hysterical and grey goo-related,
industry is desperately seeking to silence all voices of caution. In
doing so, they risk making ever larger mistakes.
Seminar in European Parliament: Together with The European
Greens, The Ecologist, Greenpeace, the Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation, Genewatch
UK, Clean Production Action and a cross-party group of MEPs, ETC Group will hold
a seminar on nanotechnology in the European Parliament in Brussels on June 11th
2003. Led by international experts, the seminar will look at both the issues
related to nanoparticle safety and the potential for molecular self-assembly
with a view to consider appropriate steps for societal discourse and government
regulation. Speakers include physicist Dr. Vandana Shiva and toxicologist Dr.
Vyvyan Howard. The seminar will be followed, on June 12th by a discussion among
civil society organizations in Europe on strategies to address the issues
involved in nanotechnology. For further information please see ETC Group's
website, www.etcgroup.org.
1 Jonathan Oliver, "Charles: 'Grey Goo' Threat To the
World," The Mail on Sunday, April 27, 2003, p1. For responses, see: Japer
Gerard, "Charles gets in a wee tizz over nanotechnology," Sunday Times (London),
April 27, 2003 and Anon., "MP's anti-science slur on the Prince," Norwich
Evening News, April 28, 2003.
2 Alexander Goho, "Life
Made to Order," Technology Review, April 2003. Available on the Internet:
www.technnologyreview.com
3 Ibid.
4 Ibid.
ETC Group will release a new Communiqué related to this
subject in May, 2003.
The
Action Group on Erosion, Technology and Concentration, formerly RAFI, is an
international civil society organization headquartered in Canada. The ETC group
is dedicated to the advancement of cultural and ecological diversity and human
rights. www.etcgroup.org. The ETC group is also a member of the
Community Biodiversity Development and Conservation Programme
(CBDC). The CBDC is a collaborative experimental initiative involving
civil society organizations and public research institutions in 14
countries. The CBDC is dedicated to the exploration of
community-directed programmes to strengthen the conservation and enhancement of
agricultural biodiversity. The CBDC website is www.cbdcprogram.org .
TUESDAY HEARING ON HR 1835 -- CALL YOUR REPRESENTATIVES TO
OPPOSE ANOTHER POMBO - YOUNG ATTACK ON THE ESA Ø DEMOCRATS: REPUBLICANS:
Among other things, HR 1835 would:
Broadly eliminate federal agencies' duty to conserve (i.e.,
protect and recover) threatened and endangered species under the ESA. This would apply to
all federal agencies, including the Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management,
Bureau of Reclamation, and other agencies which have a record of harming
imperiled species and their habitats, unless forced to protect them by the ESA
and other laws.
Broadly weaken the US Fish & Wildlife Service and
National Marine Fisheries Service's duty under the ESA to designate "critical
habitats" for species newly listed as threatened and endangered. Critical habitat
designations are intended to provide important immediate protections for these
imperiled species on federal public lands, and to help identify and protect
federal public lands needed for species' recovery.
Allow the Secretary of Defense to exempt the military from
any and all provisions of the Marine Mammal Protection Act, if the Secretary
determines the exemptions are needed for "national security." These exemptions
would not have to meet ANY substantive criteria or definitions of "national
security," and the decision would be entirely up to the Secretary of
Defense. These
exemptions could also be very broad and sweeping, and could literally apply to
any military-related actions, including training and research, for as long as
two years at a time.
202/225-2095
202/225-6161
202/225-2701
202/225-2161
202/225-3611
202/225-5506
202/225-6065
202/225-6311
202/225-6190
202/225-4765
202-225-1947
202-225-5765
202-225-5811
202-225-1986
202-225-4761
202-225-2311
202-225-7751
202-225-6155
202-225-4436
202-225-6730
202-225-2190
202-225-6435
202-225-2635
202-225-2315
202-225-6165
202-225-2365
202-225-0453
202-225-2523
202-225-1252
akrain.org/
Bush Administration “Rainforest Campaign” Begins!
Cholmondeley Logging Project First Assault on Tongass
National Forest Roadless Areas
TAKE ACTION: Tell Forest Service Chief Bosworth that you
OPPOSE ALL ROADLESS AREA LOGGING in the Tongass National Forest! Here’s what you
can do to help:
1. Email Chief
Bosworth - dbosworth@fs.fed.us. (A sample email message is included at the end
of this alert that you can personalize and send.)
2. Call Chief Bosworth (202)
205-1661. Call first thing Monday morning or leave a message this weekend! Tell
the Chief that you oppose ALL logging projects in roadless areas of the Tongass
National Forest including the Cholmondeley (pronounced chom-lee) project.
*****
The Bush Administration released yesterday (May 1, 2003)
the Record of Decision for the Cholmondeley (pronounced Chomlee) logging
project, the first of approximately 50 projects scheduled in roadless areas of
the Tongass National Forest.
"This sale is a sign of things to come, bad things," says
Tim Bristol of the Alaska Coalition. "We expect three more sales in quick
succession to be followed by a dismantling of Tongass protections included in
the Roadless Rule," says Bristol. "It's a slow motion disaster for our biggest,
wettest, wildest national forest, coming to you courtesy of the Bush
administration."
Once again,
the administration has revealed that they value roadless areas in the Tongass
National Forest as little more than gifts to corporate special interests. At the
first opportunity available they’ve chosen not to protect a wild road-free
expanse of the rainforest, but rather have put in place a plan for large-scale
clearcuts and development in a pristine roadless area in the Tongass.
The Cholmondeley logging project
—a patchwork of clearcuts, log dumps and roads—will damage one of the last
remaining intact watersheds on Prince of Wales Island, an island already
devastated by decades of industrial scale logging. The area hosts beautiful
rolling hills, sparkling lakes and secluded ocean coves. It contains numerous
streams with large healthy runs of wild salmon. Area residents have opposed the
sale due to its potential negative impacts on drinking water. Owners of
long-established lodges, dependent on a wild - not a stump and road filled -
Alaska experience, also adamantly oppose the project.
Cholmondeley is one of four
Tongass logging projects in roadless areas not afforded protection by the wildly
popular National Roadless Area Conservation Rule. Yet it clearly violates the
spirit of the landmark conservation policy which bans commercial logging and
road building in roadless areas nationwide.
It is clear that the Bush administration is focused on an
aggressive agenda to log roadless areas in the Tongass despite the overwhelming
public support to permanently protect the crown jewel of our nation’s forest
system. The Bush administration has publicly acknowledged its intent to revise
the Roadless Rule and in doing so exempt the Tongass National Forest from any
protection. In the meantime, the Bush administration’s first direct assault on
roadless areas in the Tongass has arrived with the release of the Record of
Decision for the Cholmondeley timber project.
For more information on the Alaska rainforest contact:
Laurie Cooper, Alaska Coalition (laurie@alaskacoalition.org)
SAMPLE
EMAIL:
Dear Chief Bosworth,
I urge you to reconsider your
decision on the Cholmondeley logging project in the Tongass National Forest. I
strongly support the protection all of the roadless areas in our largest
national forest and oppose this project, as well as any other, that proposes to
clearcut and develop pristine areas of the rainforest.
The Cholmondeley logging project
is not in the best interests of the people of southeast Alaska, nor is it in the
best interest of our nation. What remains wild and road-free in the world’s
largest intact temperate rainforest should be safeguarded for generations to
come. Logging roadless areas of the Tongass is a poor decision.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
BE SURE TO INCLUDE YOUR NAME AND
FULL ADDRESS.
Thanks for your
support.
Alaska Rainforest
Campaign Staff.
1. Global Warming on the Hot
Seat
http://www.care2.com/go/z/5718
Today, U.S. Senators John McCain
(R-AZ) and Joseph
Lieberman (D-CT) should include their
Climate Stewardship
Act (S. 139) in the U.S. Energy
Bill. This groundbreaking
legislation could be the
turning point in a fight against global
warming. In
contrast with President Bush's voluntary-only cuts
in
global warming pollution from power plants, this new plan
*requires* cuts in U.S. emissions of the heat-trapping
gasses
that cause global warming.
Let the U.S. government know that
the whole world
supports U.S. efforts to curb global
warming! The U.S.
is the world's number-one
emitter of global warming
pollution, and alternative
fuels exist TODAY that could solve
this problem. Please
sign this petition to demonstrate your
support for the
McCain-Lieberman global warming bill and new
actions to
slow global warming; even if you are not from the
United States, sign this petition to show how far reaching
the
concern about global warming is.
http://www.care2.com/go/z/5718
2. Global Warming Hits Seals and
Polar Bears
Shrinking Arctic ice caps are threatening
arctic animals.
Polar bears find it harder to find the
food as icebergs, their
"highways" to a seal food
supply, shrink away, or as ice
that normally forms
fails to appear. The giant white bears
need the ice to
gain access to ringed and barbed seals
which live and
play away from land among the ice bergs,
yet the ice is
breaking up two weeks earlier than normal
these days,
and polar bears are on average between 176
and 187
pounds lighter. Scientists believe it is because
they
cannot find food. Every day of ice hunting is critical,
as the bears must hunt to build enough fat to last through
the forced 5 month fast during winter.
Unseasonal warming can also lead
to collapses of the snow
caves where female seals bear
their young. The young as
yet have no blubber and die
of exposure when cold
conditions return. Scientists
suspect that declines in seal
populations will occur in
this manner, and will ultimately
lead to further
declines in polar bear populations.
3. Inspirational Quote:
"Let man
heal the hurt places and revere whatever is still
miraculously pristine"
- David R.
Brower
PLEASE OPPOSE the McINNIS BILL (HR 1904)
The McInnis bill will cut the heart out of NEPA, interfere
with the independent judiciary, further subsidize logging, and cut out the
public.
And the bill will do nothing to ensure protection of homes
and communities from the risk of wildfire.
During the week of May 12, 2003 the House will consider the
"Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003" (HR 1904). We urge you to
oppose this bill, which seeks to cut the heart out of NEPA -- the Magna Carta of
environmental protection, eliminate the public’s say regarding the management of
its public lands, and dramatically interfere with our independent judiciary, all
while providing new subsidies to the timber industry. This bill does not
offer more protection to communities at risk from wildfire, but rather seeks to
undermine our environmental laws and the judicial process when it comes to
logging on our public lands, potentially including national parks and wildlife
refuges.
DOES NOT ENSURE ANY
INCREASED PROTECTION FOR COMMUNITIES:
CUTS THE HEART OUT OF
NEPA:
PROVIDES EVEN MORE SUBSIDIES FOR THE TIMBER INDUSTRY:
THE
WILDERNESS SOCIETY
U.S.
PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH GROUP
As American consumers struggle through tough economic times,
the U.S. Senate Energy Committee has developed a disaster of a dirty energy
bill. The Senate energy bill is loaded with provisions written by and
for the utility, nuclear, coal and oil industries that threaten our pocketbooks,
public health, national security and environment.
Please take a moment
to urge your senators to reject this dirty and expensive energy bill.
To
take action, click on this link or paste it into your web browser:
http://pirg.org/alerts/route.asp?id=30&id4=ES
Last month, the U.S. House passed its version of the energy
bill. The U.S. House energy bill delivers far more to the oil and
nuclear industry than it will ever deliver to American consumers. The
U.S. Senate is poised to vote on its energy bill as soon as this
week. The Senate energy bill is too expensive and dangerous for
America and should be rejected.
The Senate energy bill threatens
national security by increasing oil consumption. At a time when oil
prices are skyrocketing and our national security is threatened by our
dependence on oil, this bill contains no meaningful oil savings
provisions. Not only does the Senate energy bill fail to increase
vehicle fuel economy, it would make it even more difficult for the
Transportation Department to raise fuel economy than under current law by adding
new criteria for any future increases.
The bill also repeals one of the
few laws that protect electricity consumers from market manipulation and price
gouging, the Public Utility Holding Company Act. This will encourage
more Enron-type electricity market manipulation and open the door to more
California-size electricity disasters.
The Senate energy bill contains
$10.7 billion in tax breaks to polluters like the oil, gas, coal, incinerator
and nuclear industries, including a first-ever tax break for burning coal - an
incentive to increase global warming pollution. The bill also
includes an estimated $30 billion subsidy in federal loan guarantees to assist
the nuclear industry.
The Senate energy bill accelerates oil and gas
drilling in public lands. The bill contains a number of provisions
that would further erode existing environmental protections for the nation's
public lands, which provide outstanding recreation opportunities, critical fish
and wildlife habitats and serve as the headwaters for most of the drinking water
in the West. Most oil and gas resources on our public lands are
already available for oil and gas development, which is proceeding at an
unprecedented rate. Nonetheless, the energy bill seeks to further
accelerate new development of our lands for oil and gas wells, pipelines and
roads by emphasizing speed at the expense of meaningful public involvement and
environmental review of potential damage.
Please take a moment to urge your senators to reject this
dirty and expensive energy bill that threatens our pocketbooks, public health,
national security and the environment.
To take action, click on this link or paste it into your
web browser:
http://pirg.org/alerts/route.asp?id=30&id4=ES
Sincerely,
Gene Karpinski
U.S. PIRG Executive Director
GeneK@uspirg.org
http://www.USPIRG.org
Greenpeace Activist News, Vol. 3, No. 4
7 May 2003
In this action packed issue, nuclear playing cards, a war
update, attack of the speech bubbles, threats to African forests and beaches, a
blubber victory, GE wheat in Canada, dirty oil in Australia, and ... have you
cast your Webby vote for Greenpeace yet?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You can change your email address, unsubscribe from
this list,
and have a forgotten cybercentre password
mailed to you using
the links at the bottom of this
message. Please remember to
delete these links before
forwarding this message to anyone
else.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
SUITS AND NUKES
Nuclear weapons and the nuclear
non-proliferation treaty (NPT) are the topic being discussed this week by world
governments meeting in Geneva. While much media attention has focussed recently
on whether Iraq did or did not possess weapons of mass destruction, it is clear
that the major possessors of these weapons, namely the US, Russia, the UK,
France, China, Israel, Pakistan and India, have not made enough progress in
eliminating them. When the NPT was agreed in 1968, there were approximately
38,000 nuclear weapons in the world. Today, there are still approximately
30,000.
After Greenpeace
created a pack of playing cards showing the major leaders behind the global
stockpiles of nuclear weapons and distributed decks in Geneva, the media and
public response was overwhelming.
You can read more about the NPT and the playing cards here:
http://greenpeace.org/features/details?item_id=234491
Check out the nuclear
solitare game in the box on the right (requires the latest version of Flash).
We may do a second larger
printing of these playing cards. If you would like to register to express your
interest in getting one (or more) decks, you can do it here:
http://act.greenpeace.org/col/get?i=770&sk=std2&la=en
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
UNITING FOR PEACE
Your overwhelming and record breaking response to the
Uniting for Peace initiative during the war in Iraq had a great influence. Our
lobbyists at the UN received lots of positive feedback from Ambassadors about
the quantity of public support the initiative had, and although the Arab League
DID in fact put in a call for a special General Assembly meeting on the war in
the first week of April, events in Baghdad overtook the initiative, and it was
withdrawn.
However, the
struggle over this issue continues. The UN Security Council continues to wrangle
over the role of inspectors, the transition in Iraq, the lifting of sanctions,
the question of weapons of mass destruction, and the fear of who the Bush
administration will target next. The call by the public, politicians and
governments to uphold the UN Charter and the rule of law, and to oppose US
unilateralism and the Bush doctrine continues. There is now an on-line petition
supporting the principles that we continue to push for at the UN. Please sign
today at:
http://www.uniting-for-peace.net
and add your voice to those who
don't want to see another 'preventive war'!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ATTACK OF THE SPEECH BUBBLES
More than 1100 people have uploaded a speech bubble image
attacking Esso/Exxon/Mobil for undermining action against global warming and
climate change. You can visit the image gallery and upload your own image from:
http://www.stopesso.org
While you are there, you
may also want to visit one of the many national Don't Buy Esso/Exxon/Mobil sites
by using the drop down box at the top.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
HELP BLOCK BLOODY TIMBER
The Liberian timber industry has been supporting arms
trafficking and regional conflict through financial and logistical support since
the diamond export ban. Because of overwhelming evidence, the United Nations
Security Council has agreed to an export ban on Liberian timber to put an end to
the active and violent destabilisation implemented by the Liberian government in
the region. This ban does not come into effect until July and in the meantime
this blood stained timber is flooding into markets.
Take action to support our efforts to stop the import of
Liberian timber and urge German timber company Offermann to cancel all existing
contracts for Liberian timber immediately:
http://act.greenpeace.org/ams/e?a=772&s=for
And get ready for many more forest
actions to come!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
STOP SHIPBREAKING IN GUINEA BISSAU
The beautiful Bolama beach in the
West African country of Guinea Bissau may soon turn into a scrapyard for old
toxic ships, threatening nature and the lives of local people. The beach is part
of the Bijagos Archipelagos, classified as a Biosphere Reserve by the United
Nations (Unesco). Help to save the Bolama beach! Let the United Nations know
they should protect the nature and people of Guinea Bissau. You can also send a
beautiful e-card to tell your friends about this cyberaction.
http://act.greenpeace.org/ams/e?a=766&s=ship
Help Greenpeace spot toxic ships
destined for scrapping
Are you
connected to the shipping industry, a ship spotter, a harbourmaster, a crew
member or in any other way able to localize the positions of ships that are
destined for shipbreaking beaches? We need your help! Please visit the
Greenpeace shipbreaking website:
http://www.greenpeaceweb.org/shipbreak/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
BLUBBER VICTORY
Over the past two years, more than 30 thousand
cyberactivists wrote to the Norwegian prime minister asking him to stop plans to
export whale blubber to Japan and other countries. We now have a victory!
Here's the update from our whale
campaign:
A committee of
Norwegian scientists has formally recognised the high levels of toxic compounds
in whale blubber produced by Norway hunt and recommended that human consumption
of whale blubber be banned in Norway. Their tests showed that one gram of minke
blubber had about 95 picograms of PCB-related pollutants, almost a tenth of the
maximum weekly intake under European Union guidelines. PCBs build up in fatty
tissues and have been linked to birth defects.
The recommendation to ban consumption of blubber in Norway
ends the possiblity of export to Japan. This is a real blow to the Norwegian
whaling industry whose expansion has been driven by hopes of increased profits
through export.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
HELP STOP MONSANTO GE WHEAT
Wheat is the single biggest food source in the world -- and
the oldest. Canada and the US sell one fifth of the world's wheat -- second only
to China. Now Monsanto is asking for permission to sell genetically engineered
wheat in North America.
Take
action today by signing this petition urging the Canadian government to ban GE
wheat:
http://www.greenpeace.ca/e/action/wheat/index.php
For more information, watch "Slice
of Life", a 9-minute video documenting just how much is at stake, for our food
supply and for our farmers. You can see the video on-line here:
http://www.greenpeace.org/multimedia/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
HELP STOP DIRTY AUSTRALIAN OIL
At the end of April an obscure US private energy investment
fund, Sandefer Capital Partners, agreed to invest A$52 million in Australian
shale oil company Southern Pacific Petroleum (SPP).
See
http://www.greenpeace.org.au/climate/causes/criminals/shaleoil/overview.html
for more information.
Sandefer's investment is crucial
for SPP. Sandefer has said it will also consider arranging the A$600 million
needed to expand the pilot plant to commercial scale.
Please email Sandefer's President
and call on him to withdraw Sandefer's investment in SPP and dirty shale oil.
http://www.greenpeace.org.au/climate/takeaction/sandefer/stop_shale.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
HELP GREENPEACE WIN A WEBBY
Have you done your part to make sure we win a
webby? You've been meaning to do it, but you just haven't had the
time, right? Well take a moment now!
We're currently the front runners, but only by a slim
margin, and voting closes very soon. If you've enjoyed being a part of victories
such as our successful cyberaction protecting the ancient Finnish forest from
logging this year, or our on-going work against destructive corporations such as
Dow, ExxonMobil or Monsanto, and want more people to join us in online activism
in the future, vote for Greenpeace. It's a vote for online communities like
ours, and the future of activism on the web. Follow the link below, pick up a
password in your mailbox, and vote!
http://www.webbyawards.com/peoplesvoice/
VISIT THE CYBERCENTRE
Please don't forget to visit the
Greenpeace Cyberactivist Community at:
http://act.greenpeace.org
News
Release
Wednesday, May 7th 2003
www.etcgroup.org
Europe's (and the World's) Big Soy Berger:
Patently Wrong!
After delays, denial, and double standards, Monsanto
maintains unjust monopoly
on major food crop. Time to
talk to the cooks about a new recipe?
In a jaw-dropping affirmation of Monsanto's monopoly
control over commodity crops, one of the world's most notorious patents for
genetically engineered crops was yesterday upheld by the European Patent Office
(EPO) in Munich - this despite a nine year battle by civil society
(and industry) to have it revoked. European Patent No. 301,749,
granted in March 1994, is an exceptionally broad "species patent" which grants
gene giant Monsanto exclusive monopoly over all forms of genetically engineered
soybean varieties and seeds - irrespective of the genes used or the
transformation technique employed. The patent, attacked as immoral and
technically invalid by food security advocates worldwide, was vigorously opposed
by Monsanto itself until they purchased the original patent holder (Agracetus)
in 1996, and switched sides to make the soybean species patent a major
ingredient in its global recipe for crop monopoly.
Backburner: The case simmered on the EPO's backburner for
an astonishing nine years before reaching the patent tribunal in Munich
yesterday. The EPO took only ten hours (including coffee and cake breaks) to
hear oral arguments and uphold Monsanto's monopoly. Monsanto did surrender one
unsustainable claim in the patent (claim no. 25), which sought control beyond
soybeans to other plants as well.
ETC Group, who maintained its opposition to the patent
since first uncovering it nearly a decade ago, were present in Munich yesterday
with expert legal counsel, UK barrister Daniel Alexander and patent attorney Tim
Roberts. Other opponents included Greenpeace, activist Stefan Geene, Syngenta
and Pioneer Hi-Bred (a subsidiary of DuPont).
ETC Group and other opponents expressed bitter
disappointment at the outcome.
Same old recipe: "Monsanto has made overtures in the media
to reinvent themselves as a gentler, humbler company," said Hope Shand, ETC
Group Research Director, "But their behavior in court showed that where it
matters, Monsanto is still aggressively pursuing monopolistic control by any
means available. Even more alarming is how readily the patent system rewards
such behavior, ignoring basic morality, and failing to encourage socially
beneficial innovation. When ETC Group first challenged this patent we were
primarily concerned about the threat to food security from the Gene Giants -
today, nine years later, we find ourselves equally shocked and concerned about
the threat to democracy from such an unresponsive patent system. It portends
much larger patent problems to come with nanotechnology and other emerging
technologies."
"This is a
thoroughly bad decision," said patent attorney Tim Roberts. "You would look far
to find another patent in which such a small advance has justified such an
enormous claim. It seems to have been reached by mechanically applying
inappropriate precedent, while ignoring the fundamental principle of the patent
system - the balance of rights between the innovator and society. If the
Opposition Board's decision is correct in law, then the law needs to be
changed,"
said Roberts.
SARS bars and Geene engineering: Monsanto began the
proceedings in Munich with successful legal moves to deny some expert witnesses
the right to speak; including Dr. Suman Sahai of the Gene Campaign who had been
brought by Greenpeace from India to testify about the impact of the patent on
food security. Most amazingly, soybean experts from China, the genetic homeland
of soya, had already been barred from the EPO court because of SARS fears.
Monsanto then proposed to the tribunal that ETC Group and long-time German
campaigner Stefan Geene be disqualified from the hearing, claiming that Geene,
despite being present in the courtroom, was a 'fictitious person'. Although
Monsanto's request was denied, it set the tone for its strategy throughout the
day. Debate on ethical questions was largely marginalised by Monsanto and an
unresponsive Tribunal.
Secret
Recipe: Perhaps most astonishing was Monsanto's legal maneuvering to sidestep
its own evidence. In 1994 Monsanto gave unambiguous evidence in an opposition
statement requesting that the patent be revoked. One of Monsanto's top
scientists testified in 1994 that the genetic engineering process described in
the patent was insufficient to allow someone skilled in the science to replicate
the procedure - a necessary criterion for patentability. Nevertheless Monsanto's
lawyers successfully argued that the company should be allowed monopoly over any
genetically engineered soybean seed and variety obtained through any and all
modification processes.
Let
them eat cake? "It's a bit like publishing a badly written cake recipe and then
claiming ownership of any cakes baked by anybody using any recipe any time in
the future," explained Jim Thomas, of ETC Group's Oxford office. "In fact, since
acquiring Agracetus, Monsanto has already leveraged this patent as part of their
strategy to grab as much of the cake as they can - seeking to control one of the
world's most important food crops. Monsanto now controls 100% of the world's
genetically engineered soybeans covering 36.5 million hectares in 2002 - that's
over half of the world's total soybean area. It's hard to imagine a more blatant
and dangerous monopoly."
Soy
Berger King: According to Dr. Christoph Then, patent expert for Greenpeace,
"This case is a clear signal that the European Patent Directive should be
revoked. Europe needs new patent legislation that expressly prohibits patents on
life." Dr. Then and Stefan Geene represented Greenpeace at the EPO tribunal
yesterday.
Matter Monopolies:
ETC Group also regards the maintenance of this patent as a dangerous precedent
for other broad claims on new emerging technologies, in particular
nanotechnology - the atomic manipulation of matter to create new molecular
forms. "This broad patent on Soybeans was allowed precisely because aggressive
corporations and lax governments were pushing the boundaries in the early days
of biotech, allowing exclusive monopoly patents on all biological products and
processes," explained Shand. "Today, corporations are grabbing nano-patents on
molecular products and processes, even the chemical elements that make up all of
nature. With nanotech patents, 'Matter Moguls' threaten to control the
fundamental building blocks of nature. "
Recipe change: "We fear that the EPO decision on Monsanto's
soybean patent gives comfort to those who want to establish ever wider legal
claims - including matter monopolies," emphasized Jim Thomas. "Monsanto may have
won an entire species but others are seeking to monopolise entire elements of
nature. Atomic-level manufacturing provides new opportunities for sweeping
monopoly control over both living and non-living matter." With technologies
converging at the nanoscale, ETC Group warns that efforts to oppose intellectual
monopolies must not be limited to campaigns against the patenting of life. This
issue will be discussed at an upcoming seminar for policy makers, civil society
and the media in the European Parliament in Brussels on June 11th. "If the
recipe is this bad we'll take it back to the cooks," Thomas concludes.
Seminar in European Parliament:
Together with the European Greens, The Ecologist, Greenpeace, The Dag
Hammarskjöld Foundation, Genewatch UK, Clean Production Action and a cross-party
group of MEP's, ETC Group will hold a seminar on nanotechnology in the European
Parliament in Brussels on June 11, 2003. Led by international experts, the
seminar will look at both the issues related to nanotech and intellectual
property as well as societal and safety questions with a view to consider
appropriate steps for government regulation. Speakers include physicist Dr.
Vandana Shiva and toxicologist Dr. Vyvyan Howard. The seminar will be followed
on June 12 by a discussion among civil society organisations in Europe on
strategies to address the issues involved in nanotechnology. For further
information please see ETC Group's website: www.etcgroup.org or contact jim@etcgroup.org.
Note to editors: Although the EPO
tribunal decisively ruled in favour of Monsanto, the panel will not release its
written judgment for several more weeks.
For further information:
Pat
Mooney, ETC Group (Canada) +1 204 4535259
Jim Thomas, ETC Group (UK)
jim@etcgroup.org +44 (0) 1865 207818
or Mobile +44 (0)
7752 106806
Hope Shand, ETC Group
(USA) hope@etcgroup.org +1 919 9605223
Silvia Ribeiro,
ETC Group (Mexico) silvia@etcgroup.org +52 55 55 632 664
The Action Group on Erosion,
Technology and Concentration, formerly RAFI, is an international civil society
organization headquartered in Canada. The ETC group is dedicated to the
advancement of cultural and ecological diversity and human rights. www.etcgroup.org. The
ETC group is also a member of the Community Biodiversity Development and
Conservation Programme (CBDC). The CBDC is a collaborative experimental
initiative involving civil society organizations and public research
institutions in 14 countries. The CBDC is dedicated to the exploration of
community-directed programmes to strengthen the conservation and enhancement of
agricultural biodiversity. The CBDC website is www.cbdcprogram.org.
|
|
|
ACTION DEADLINE: May 12, 2003
Introduced
by Senators John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Joseph Lieberman (D-Conn.), the
Climate Stewardship Act could come up for a vote soon. |
|
|||||||||
»» Tell Your Friends »» Take Action Around the World »» Protect the Arctic Refuge from Drilling »» Urge Congress to Help Rhinos, Tigers, and More |
| |||||||||
| If you have
any questions or problems with taking action contact
us for help. Visit your Personal Action Center and click on "Edit Your Profile" if you prefer to receive alerts in text format. |
||||||||||
Tiger & Rhino:©WWF-Canon/Martin Harvey Whale:©Melissa S. Cole Panda:©EyeWire, Inc. | |
| ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
|
On
June 2, the Federal Communications Commission is planning on authorizing
sweeping changes to the American news media. The rule changes could allow your
local TV stations, newspaper, radio stations, and cable provider to all be owned
by one company. NBC, ABC, CBS and Fox could have the same corporate parent. The
resulting concentration of ownership could be deeply destructive to our
democracy.
When we talk to Congresspeople about this issue, their
response is usually the same: "We only hear from media lobbyists on this. It
seems like my constituents aren't very concerned with this issue." A few
thousand emails could permanently change that perception. Please join us in
asking Congress and the FCC to fight media deregulation at:
http://www.moveon.org/stopthefcc/
After the FCC and Congress relaxed radio ownership
rules, corporate giant Clear Channel Communications swept in and bought hundreds
of stations. Clear Channel has used its might to support pro-war political
rallies and conservative talk shows, keep anti-war songs off its stations,
coerce musicians into playing free promotional concerts, and bully them into
performing at its music venues. In many towns that used to have a diverse array
of radio options, Clear Channel is now the only thing on the dial.
Monopoly power is a dangerous thing, and Congress is
supposed to guard against it. But the upcoming rule change could change the
landscape for all media and usher in an era in which a few corporations control
your access to news and entertainment. Please tell Congress and the FCC to
support a diverse, competitive media landscape by going to:
http://www.moveon.org/stopthefcc/
You can also automatically have your comments publicly
filed at the FCC.
Democracy is built on the idea that the views and
beliefs of an informed citizenry are the best basis for political
decision-making. Without access to fair and balanced news, the system simply
doesn't work. And media corporations can't be trusted to balance themselves:
news corporations have shown again and again that they're willing to sacrifice
journalism to improve the bottom line. That's why we need many media entities --
to keep each other honest, and to provide the information and ideas that make
democracy happen.
Please join this critical campaign, and let Congress
know you care.
Sincerely, P.S. Here's a copy of our recent bulletin on
--Eli Pariser
MoveOn.org
May 8th, 2003