

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
One of my proudest moments came in 1992 at the inaugural Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Along with UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (which in turn led to the Kyoto Protocol), a second key outcome of this international meeting was the signing of the Convention on Biological Diversity, a groundbreaking agreement founded on the principle that conserving biological diversity is "a common concern of all humankind". Canada was the first of 189 countries to sign the agreement.B.C.'s Conservation Framework for protecting wildlife, released on July 9, made me realize, though, that all the agreements in the world won't add up to much if they aren't followed with action. For B.C., the stakes couldn't be higher.
The government's new policy was accompanied by research on the health of the province's wildlife and wilderness, which paints a dire picture. Some 1,640 species (or 43 per cent of assessed wildlife) and four "biogeoclimatic zones" (about five per cent of B.C.'s land base) are threatened enough to be of conservation concern. While these statistics are striking, we should remember that what scientists have actually identified might represent as little as 10 per cent of all species. B.C. and Alberta are the only provinces that don't have endangered species laws. But these laws are essential to addressing such a serious problem.
B.C. is home to 76 per cent of Canada's bird species, 70 per cent of its freshwater fish, 60 per cent of its evergreen trees, and thousands of other plants and animals. That biological richness makes it a critical part of Canada's overall wealth. But the action elements of the government's new wildlife policy rely on a fragmented, weak, and discretionary patchwork of existing approaches that haven't shown much success in the past, such as predator control, captive breeding, and piecemeal habitat protection. The sad reality is that most of B.C.'s species and ecosystems at risk remain poorly protected by law.
And so, although only 16 northern spotted owls are left in B.C., the government has not put a stop to logging in the old-growth forests where they live. In fact, of all the species identified as being at risk in B.C., only four are afforded marginal protection under the province's Wildlife Act.
British Columbia needs a clear law to recover wildlife at risk and to protect habitat to prevent species from becoming at risk in the first place. B.C. could look to Ontario, which enacted a new Endangered Species Act in 2007. Although the Ontario law isn't perfect, it includes strong wording for habitat protection and mandatory planning for the recovery of endangered and threatened species.
Without healthy ecosystems and species diversity, we can't hope to have healthy economies and healthy human societies. The loss of biodiversity affects not just the production of commodities like the food we eat, the timber we use to build our homes, and the medicines we use to heal ourselves, but many other so-called "ecosystem services" as well, like clean air and clean water.
However, according to the United Nations, two-thirds of the ecosystem services provided by nature are threatened by human actions, such as unsustainable logging, pollution, and global warming.
A strong endangered species law in B.C. would identify, protect, and recover at-risk biodiversity by protecting habitat. It would use sound science to identify and assess the risks and develop recovery strategies. It would take into account the effects of global warming. It would enshrine the precautionary principle, whereby the absence of full scientific certainty could not be used to postpone decisions when there is a real threat of serious harm. It should also include participation from all citizens and communities, including First Nations. And it must be adequately funded and enforced.
It's been 16 years since my hopes were raised that humanity was on the right track to creating a world that recognized the importance of biodiversity to human survival. And yet, the crisis in biodiversity has worsened. The B.C. government, along with all of Canada, still has the opportunity to lead the way. Its new policy for wildlife protection may be a start, but it doesn't match the kind of leadership the province has shown in combating global warming.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
One of my proudest moments came in 1992 at the inaugural Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Along with UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (which in turn led to the Kyoto Protocol), a second key outcome of this international meeting was the signing of the Convention on Biological Diversity, a groundbreaking agreement founded on the principle that conserving biological diversity is "a common concern of all humankind". Canada was the first of 189 countries to sign the agreement.B.C.'s Conservation Framework for protecting wildlife, released on July 9, made me realize, though, that all the agreements in the world won't add up to much if they aren't followed with action. For B.C., the stakes couldn't be higher.
The government's new policy was accompanied by research on the health of the province's wildlife and wilderness, which paints a dire picture. Some 1,640 species (or 43 per cent of assessed wildlife) and four "biogeoclimatic zones" (about five per cent of B.C.'s land base) are threatened enough to be of conservation concern. While these statistics are striking, we should remember that what scientists have actually identified might represent as little as 10 per cent of all species. B.C. and Alberta are the only provinces that don't have endangered species laws. But these laws are essential to addressing such a serious problem.
B.C. is home to 76 per cent of Canada's bird species, 70 per cent of its freshwater fish, 60 per cent of its evergreen trees, and thousands of other plants and animals. That biological richness makes it a critical part of Canada's overall wealth. But the action elements of the government's new wildlife policy rely on a fragmented, weak, and discretionary patchwork of existing approaches that haven't shown much success in the past, such as predator control, captive breeding, and piecemeal habitat protection. The sad reality is that most of B.C.'s species and ecosystems at risk remain poorly protected by law.
And so, although only 16 northern spotted owls are left in B.C., the government has not put a stop to logging in the old-growth forests where they live. In fact, of all the species identified as being at risk in B.C., only four are afforded marginal protection under the province's Wildlife Act.
British Columbia needs a clear law to recover wildlife at risk and to protect habitat to prevent species from becoming at risk in the first place. B.C. could look to Ontario, which enacted a new Endangered Species Act in 2007. Although the Ontario law isn't perfect, it includes strong wording for habitat protection and mandatory planning for the recovery of endangered and threatened species.
Without healthy ecosystems and species diversity, we can't hope to have healthy economies and healthy human societies. The loss of biodiversity affects not just the production of commodities like the food we eat, the timber we use to build our homes, and the medicines we use to heal ourselves, but many other so-called "ecosystem services" as well, like clean air and clean water.
However, according to the United Nations, two-thirds of the ecosystem services provided by nature are threatened by human actions, such as unsustainable logging, pollution, and global warming.
A strong endangered species law in B.C. would identify, protect, and recover at-risk biodiversity by protecting habitat. It would use sound science to identify and assess the risks and develop recovery strategies. It would take into account the effects of global warming. It would enshrine the precautionary principle, whereby the absence of full scientific certainty could not be used to postpone decisions when there is a real threat of serious harm. It should also include participation from all citizens and communities, including First Nations. And it must be adequately funded and enforced.
It's been 16 years since my hopes were raised that humanity was on the right track to creating a world that recognized the importance of biodiversity to human survival. And yet, the crisis in biodiversity has worsened. The B.C. government, along with all of Canada, still has the opportunity to lead the way. Its new policy for wildlife protection may be a start, but it doesn't match the kind of leadership the province has shown in combating global warming.
One of my proudest moments came in 1992 at the inaugural Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Along with UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (which in turn led to the Kyoto Protocol), a second key outcome of this international meeting was the signing of the Convention on Biological Diversity, a groundbreaking agreement founded on the principle that conserving biological diversity is "a common concern of all humankind". Canada was the first of 189 countries to sign the agreement.B.C.'s Conservation Framework for protecting wildlife, released on July 9, made me realize, though, that all the agreements in the world won't add up to much if they aren't followed with action. For B.C., the stakes couldn't be higher.
The government's new policy was accompanied by research on the health of the province's wildlife and wilderness, which paints a dire picture. Some 1,640 species (or 43 per cent of assessed wildlife) and four "biogeoclimatic zones" (about five per cent of B.C.'s land base) are threatened enough to be of conservation concern. While these statistics are striking, we should remember that what scientists have actually identified might represent as little as 10 per cent of all species. B.C. and Alberta are the only provinces that don't have endangered species laws. But these laws are essential to addressing such a serious problem.
B.C. is home to 76 per cent of Canada's bird species, 70 per cent of its freshwater fish, 60 per cent of its evergreen trees, and thousands of other plants and animals. That biological richness makes it a critical part of Canada's overall wealth. But the action elements of the government's new wildlife policy rely on a fragmented, weak, and discretionary patchwork of existing approaches that haven't shown much success in the past, such as predator control, captive breeding, and piecemeal habitat protection. The sad reality is that most of B.C.'s species and ecosystems at risk remain poorly protected by law.
And so, although only 16 northern spotted owls are left in B.C., the government has not put a stop to logging in the old-growth forests where they live. In fact, of all the species identified as being at risk in B.C., only four are afforded marginal protection under the province's Wildlife Act.
British Columbia needs a clear law to recover wildlife at risk and to protect habitat to prevent species from becoming at risk in the first place. B.C. could look to Ontario, which enacted a new Endangered Species Act in 2007. Although the Ontario law isn't perfect, it includes strong wording for habitat protection and mandatory planning for the recovery of endangered and threatened species.
Without healthy ecosystems and species diversity, we can't hope to have healthy economies and healthy human societies. The loss of biodiversity affects not just the production of commodities like the food we eat, the timber we use to build our homes, and the medicines we use to heal ourselves, but many other so-called "ecosystem services" as well, like clean air and clean water.
However, according to the United Nations, two-thirds of the ecosystem services provided by nature are threatened by human actions, such as unsustainable logging, pollution, and global warming.
A strong endangered species law in B.C. would identify, protect, and recover at-risk biodiversity by protecting habitat. It would use sound science to identify and assess the risks and develop recovery strategies. It would take into account the effects of global warming. It would enshrine the precautionary principle, whereby the absence of full scientific certainty could not be used to postpone decisions when there is a real threat of serious harm. It should also include participation from all citizens and communities, including First Nations. And it must be adequately funded and enforced.
It's been 16 years since my hopes were raised that humanity was on the right track to creating a world that recognized the importance of biodiversity to human survival. And yet, the crisis in biodiversity has worsened. The B.C. government, along with all of Canada, still has the opportunity to lead the way. Its new policy for wildlife protection may be a start, but it doesn't match the kind of leadership the province has shown in combating global warming.