Premiers’ energy strategy lacking  

The recent premiers’ conference in Newfoundland illustrates how firmly the oil and gas industry has our politicians in its pocket.   Saskatchewan Premier Brad Wall, who hopes to turn Saskatchewan into another tarsands province, was the most obvious. The irony is that he is presiding over a province consumed by wildfires which are a direct result of climate change which is a direct result of our use of fossil fuels. And he wants to produce more?   Climate change was given lip service, but there were no definite commitments.   This is insanity. If our premiers had our welfare at heart, they would be doing all in their power to support, encourage and subsidize renewable energy, instead of giving enormous taxpayer subsidies to the oil and gas industry. Many studies also prove that renewable energy -- solar, wind, water – would create many more jobs than the highly subsidized oil and gas industry.   A fossil fuel future guarantees chaotic weather patterns leading to crop losses, farmer bankruptcies, homeowner disasters, food scarcities, water shortages and health catastrophes. The pollution of rivers and waterways -- such as the July 17 spill of five million litres of tarsands bitumen at Fort MacMurray and exploding tarsands oil trains, such as in Lac Megantic, contribute to a general breakdown of all ecosystem services that make life on Earth possible.   I don’t want to believe these premiers are stupid -- but there’s only one alternative -- -that they have sold out.   Mary de La Valette   Porter Cove

Est-ce que vous aimeriez en savoir davantage sur les divers projets liées à l'adaptation aux changements climatiques qui sont mis en oeuvre dans la province cette année? Vous êtes au bon endroit!

Le 24 juin, le RENB a organisé un atelier pour les ONGE sur l'adaptation aux changements climatiques. Un total de 12 ONGE ainsi que quelques autres organisations étaient représentées. Au courant de la journée, les participants ont pu cartograohier les projets d'adaptation dans la province et réseauter avec d'autres passionés d'adaptatation aux changements climatiques afin d'échanger des outils et des ressources et de faire les liens entre les différents projets d'adaptation qui seront mis en oeuvre au cours de la prochaine année. 

Suite à l'atelier, les données ont été compilées et transformées en cartes interactives. Elles sont maintenant disponible sur notre site web! Cliquez ici afin de les consulter. 

Le rapport de l'atelier est également disponible ici. 
Fredericton – In its latest annual report released in advance of Canada Parks Day, the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society (CPAWS) is calling Canada out for falling behind most other countries in protecting its land and fresh water.  CPAWS’ 2015 report, Protecting Canada: Is it in our nature?, assesses whether our governments are on track to meet their collective international commitment to protect at least 17% of our land and fresh water by 2020, and to improve the quality of our protected areas.
“Based on our assessment of progress since Canada endorsed the UN Convention on Biological Diversity 10-year plan in 2010, it would take us 50 years from today, not five, to meet our commitment to protect at least 17% of our land and fresh water. And 17% is only the next step we need to take towards protecting at least half to ensure Canada continues to have healthy, functioning ecosystems,” says Alison Woodley, national director of CPAWS’ parks program.
“In New Brunswick, we are particularly worried that New Brunswick is so far behind most of the other provinces in Canada, there is no plan in place to catch up, and no commitment to add any new protected areas,” says Roberta Clowater, Executive Director of CPAWS New Brunswick.
“Furthermore, the opportunities for creating more protected areas in the future are quickly being foreclosed due to the province’s new Crown Forestry strategy. There will be fewer and fewer wild forest options left to add to the protected areas systems over time.”

Slow to no progress since 2011

CPAWS found that the current percentage of lands and inland waters protected varies dramatically across Canada, ranging from just under three percent in Prince Edward Island, to more than 15% in British Columbia.  Since 2011, the area protected in Alberta, Newfoundland and Labrador and the Yukon Territory has not grown at all, and all other provinces have increased protection by less than 2%. B.C.’s progress is undermined by its 2014 Parks Act amendments that allow industrial research in parks and boundary changes to accommodate pipelines and logging.

Reasons for optimism

“Some of Canada’s provinces and territories and Indigenous communities are making impressive efforts to advance protected areas. Quebec and Ontario have committed to protecting half of their northern territories, although implementation of these commitments is very slow. Nova Scotia has ramped up efforts and appears to be on track to reach 14% protection, Manitoba has committed to creating 15 new parks and protected areas and to expanding others, and Alberta, the Northwest Territories and Nunavut all have land use planning processes underway that could lead to new, large protected areas,” says Woodley.

At the federal level, a large new national park called Qausuittuq in Nunavut (11,000 km2) was just finalized in June, and two more could be announced within the next year. These include an area called Thaidene Nene around the East Arm of Great Slave Lake, NWT, where approximately 30,000 km2 could become a combined national and territorial park shortly. Similarly, the process for finalizing the 10,700 km2 Mealy Mountains National Park Reserve in Labrador is nearing completion, with an adjacent 3,000 km2 provincial park still at the early stages of establishment.
Local Indigenous communities are playing a significant leadership role and partnering with federal, provincial, and/or territorial governments to protect many of these large areas.
CPAWS calculates that if existing plans for creating new protected areas were implemented, along with other commitments for which specific sites have not yet been confirmed, Canada could meet its obligation to reach 17% protection by 2020.

Government leadership needed In New Brunswick

Over the past 20 years, New Brunswick has only moved from 1.3% to 4.7% of the province in permanently and legally designated protected areas.
“We’re looking for New Brunswick to take on leadership to help meet Canada’s 2020 protected area commitments. To start, the New Brunswick government needs to revise the Crown Forestry Strategy to allow space for new forested protected areas across the province, and needs to commit to an ambitious  plan to establish new protected areas around ecologically important forests, coastal shores, cliffs, wetlands and river headwaters. We cannot maintain the current slow pace of protection, because we are losing opportunities to protect our wild nature at an even faster rate,” says Roberta Clowater.


View executive summary and full report at:
For interviews, contact: Roberta Clowater,; phone: 506-452-9902
Founded in 1963, CPAWS is Canada’s only nationwide charity dedicated solely to protecting our public land and water, and ensuring our parks are managed to protect the nature within.
Achetez-vous des produits locaux? Souhaitez-vous avoir plus d’options pour les produits alimentaires locaux?

Le gouvernement provincial veut élaborer une stratégie de promotion des produits alimentaires locaux et ils cherchent les opinions des Néo-Brunswickois et Néo-Brunswickoises concernant leurs habitudes d’achat local. Le sondage comprend des questions sur l’importance du soutien aux producteurs locaux, sur l’endroit où les aliments locaux sont achetés et sur ce qui peut être fait pour améliorer l’accès des consommateurs aux boissons et aux aliments locaux.

Voir le sondage ici et les autres renseignements sur l’initiative du gouvernement « achetez local » ici.

Pour diffusion immédiate

le 2 juillet 2015

16 Groupes confirment leur soutien à l’Évènement sur le Climat à Fredericton dans le cadre de la Marche pour les emplois, la justice et le climat qui aura lieu dans les villes canadiennes le 4 juillet

Fredericton – Une coalition de 16 groupes communautaires et environnementaux a émis une déclaration commune d’appui à la « Marche pour les emplois, la justice et le climat » qui aura lieu ce samedi 4 juillet, de 13 heures à 13 h 45 au centre-ville de Fredericton au Nouveau-Brunswick.

Toute la population est invitée à se rencontrer en face de l’édifice de l’Assemblée législative au 706, rue Queen à Fredericton à 13 heures. Une courte marche aura lieu jusqu’à la passerelle du pont du chemin de fer pour une série de photos avec le fleuve Saint-Jean (Wolastoq) à l’arrière-plan. Tout le monde y trouvera de nombreuses bannières et plusieurs panneaux ROUGE « EmploisJusticeClimatActions. » Une belle occasion de prendre des photos sur le pont pour démontrer notre appui à une juste transition vers un avenir énergétique propre.

Fredericton se joindra à des collectivités de toutes les régions canadiennes où se dérouleront des manifestations pour le climat dont, Saint-Jean, Annapolis Valley, Halifax, la ville de Québec, Lac Mégantic, Hudson-Oka, Thunder Bay, Winnipeg, Saskatoon, Edmonton, Nelson et Vancouver. Le weekend va culminer dans un grand rassemblement planifié pour le lendemain 5 juillet à Toronto avec la participation de leadeurs bien connus des syndicats, des communautés indigènes et des groupes de cession d’actifs.

Dans leur déclaration conjointe, les 16 groupes ont demandé instamment à nos leadeurs politiques d’agir pour le climat, « Nous nous joignons aux collectivités qui se tiennent debout devant les oléoducs des sables bitumineux et avec les organisateurs du désinvestissement des étudiants qui se battent pour un avenir climatique sécuritaire. Nous nous unissons aux travailleurs mis à pied par milliers des champs de pétrole de l’Alberta et aux communautés indigènes qui travaillent pour construire des solutions énergétiques propres sur les premières lignes de l’extraction. »

L’organisation internationale de cession d’actifs coordonne et fait la promotion d’évènements partout au Canada. Sur son site Web, souligne l’évènement de Fredericton en disant : « À Fredericton, à la passerelle qui domine le fleuve Saint-Jean/Wolastoq, les gens vont se réunir pour démontrer qu’ils sont prêts pour une économie qui travaille pour les gens. » Et souligne aussi que : « Ces rassemblements tentent de suivre la direction des communautés des Premières nations qui sont aux premières lignes de l’extraction des carburants fossiles et de la crise climatique. »


Contact : Maggie Connell, Conseil des Canadiens- Chapitre de Fredericton, (506) 459-8081

Voir la déclaration complète des 16 groupes

Voir l’article '4 Reasons to Get Excited about July 4th'

Page de l'évènement sur Facebook: March for Jobs, Justice & the Climate (FREDERICTON)

Branchez-vous, faites des vagues, organisé par le RENB, est un défi provincial qui encourage les groupes de jeunes et communautaires à travailler ensemble et entreprendre des projets de nettoyages de rives et de plantation d’arbres. Afin de promouvoir la conservation dans la province, les jeunes ont également pris part à un défi photo!

Ensemble, les groupes ont planté 1254 arbres et nettoyé 20 hectares de rivages !

Même si le défi 2016 s’est terminé le 21 octobre, vous pouvez toujours voter! 

Votez pour votre défi préféré en cliquant sur le site web du défi. Créez un compte Disqus pour pouvoir voter pour vos défis préférés en sélectionnant (^). La période de vote se termine le 18 novembre. 

Merci d’appuyer les efforts de conservation des jeunes et des communautés!
Le 30 mars 2015, des citoyennes et des citoyens du Nouveau-Brunswick représentant une vaste gamme de secteurs se sont rencontrés à Fredericton afin de développer des idées et discuter des options de gestion forestière au Nouveau-Brunswick. Le rapport de cette conférence est maintenant disponible en ligne.

Cet évènement a été suscité par la préoccupation largement répandue concernant la perte de biodiversité sous la Stratégie de gestion forestière annoncée en mars 2014. En bref, les buts de cette conférence étaient d’identifier les occasions, les solutions et les prochaines étapes à suivre et de les présenter au gouvernement.

Le niveau d’expertise et de connaissances de l’économie forestière et de la biodiversité a été impressionnant par sa profondeur et sa portée. Le point saillant de la journée a été la table-ronde, un groupe d’experts qui a soulevé des questions clés et qui a généré de nouvelles idées. Au courant de la journée, les participants ont également contribué au développement de ces idées et il était excitant de voir de nouvelles réflexions affichées sur le mur! Les occasions ont été identifiées au sein de trois thèmes clés :

·           La protection de la biodiversité forestière au NB;

·           L’amélioration de l’approche économique des forêts;

·           La modernisation des politiques publiques pour les forêts de la Couronne.

L’évènement était organisé par le comité directeur du Collectif pour la biodiversité. Merci à tous les présentateurs, aux participants et à ceux qui se sont portés bénévoles sur place au courant de la journée.

Cliquez ici pour lire le report.

Despite the declaration in last Saturday’s Telegraph Journal, there are several folks willing to declare that Mount Carleton is not the toughest trail to climb in Mount Carleton Park. The trail up Mount Sagamook is definitely a much more challenging hiking trail. The trail is steep and rocky for most of the distance, if you hike up the right hand trail to the outcrops that are most often featured in photos of the park.

On Friday, June 5th a group of hikers consisting NB Parks staff, a Friends of Mount Carleton representative and three members of a group named A for Adventure. “A for Adventure is all about inspiring people to get outdoors and experience adventure.” The members of the group endeavour to go on adventures, large and small, and by taking their message to the media, they hope to encourage others to get outside.

In August 2013, Jan LaPierre and Graham Carter had just finished a 200 km plus kayak paddle to Cape Sable Island. “Paddle to Sable” raised funds and awareness to create a camp for kids struggling with mental health issues at Brigadoon Village. “

On the trip home from their epic paddle, Jan began to recite a poem he was thinking up. He asked his friends if they could put together an adventure children’s book. They were all so enthused with the concept, that they stopped the car and went on a hike to discuss the idea. On that hike a book was born.

“A is for adventure, as you will come to see.
Like hiking or biking or climbing a tree,

Or taking a plane to a far away land,

Or a trip to the beach to play in the sand. “

The idea took flight and currently their group includes not only Jan LaPierre and Chris Surrette, but a recent addition is photographer Brad Sayeau. Christopher Hoyt agreed to illustrate their book, “A is for Adventure”, which is due out this month.

Meanwhile the group are taking in as many adventures as they can, in the hopes of encouraging folks young and old to get outside and see and experience the world around them. Many of their adventures are in our parks and last week they came to Mount Carleton Park, where they helped to paddle a large canoe on Little Nictau Lake and climbed Mount Sagamook. They agreed that the challenging climb was well worth the effort, once they took in the panoramic view offered from the iconic rock outcrops at the top of Sagamook. Despite the threat of rain, it held off until the group reached the parking lot at the foot of Mount Sagamook, insuring that all the camera gear was kept safely dry.

When asked for his opinion of Mount Carleton Park, Jan LaPierre summed up his experience there by saying;”Mount Carleton Park is one of those places that can’t be summed up in words. And I’m so grateful for that. It’s a place that needs to be seen, but more importantly, felt. Where, because of its authentic beauty you can” let go.”

Jan feels so passionately about his experiences in the park, that since his trip last Friday he has been talking about the park nonstop, to anyone who will listen. Jan’s only regret is that he had not come to the park sooner, but a return trip to the park is definitely in his near future.
A for Adventure advocates for a fitter population by declaring; “Get outside and do any kind of adventure, large or small. Adventure can be right in your own backyard.”
You may soon log on to their Facebook and website, to access more information and photos taken on their trip to Mount Carleton Park.

John Connell Bernadette Michaud Ian Smith and Brigitte Donald from NB Parks
John Connell, Bernadette Michaud, Ian Smith and Brigitte Clavette
from NB Parks
Labrador tea
Labrador tea
L R John Connell Jan LaPierre Chris Surette Brad SayeauIan Smith Brigitte Clavette Susan Mulherin
L-R John Connell, Jan LaPierre, Chris Surette, Brad Sayeau,Ian Smith,
Brigitte Clavette, Susan Mulherin
Little Nictau Lake
Little Nictau Lake
Nature Paddle
Outlook on Mount Sagamook
Outlook on Mount Sagamook
Purple trilliums on the trail
Purple trilliums on the trail
Stunted birch near the top of Mount Sagamook
Stunted birch near the top of Mount Sagamook
Sumi on the summit
Sumi on the summit
Top of the Mount Sagamook Trail
Top of the Mount Sagamook Trail
How do you stop a pipeline when one family owns both the oil and the media?

By: Lynaya Astephen, member of Red Head Anthony's Cove Preservation Association, read the original here

Pipeline opponent’s op-ed rejected by Irving-owned newspaper in New Brunswick

Editors’ note: Saint John’s Telegraph-Journal refused to publish this op-ed, written by a local resident to explain why over 700 people gathered on the shores of the Bay of Fundy this past Saturday to oppose Energy East, TransCanada’s proposed 1.1 million barrel per day pipeline. Like nearly all print media in the province of New Brunswick, the Telegraph-Journal is owned by the Irving family, whose company, Irving Oil, has partnered with TransCanada to build a maritime export terminal for the proposed Energy East pipeline.

I am a proud resident of Red Head, Saint John, a small rural community with quiet roads and beautiful coastal views.

TransCanada is proposing a 1.1 million barrel per day pipeline from Alberta to Saint John. After travelling almost the entire length of the country, it would end at a new deep water port on the Bay of Fundy. The Energy East project also includes a massive tank “farm” to store the oil that would be loaded onto waiting ships — across the street from my home.

Why do I oppose Energy East?

I’m worried about the air we breathe.

Saint John is highly industrialized, and residents are already exposed to increased health risks from air pollution, not to mention the oil smells near Irving’s new rail facility. We have, among other industries, Irving Oil’s export terminal and the Canaport LNG terminal. We have 38 times the industrial pollution of Fredericton and 243 times that of Moncton. A recent study found lung cancer rates 30 per cent higher in Saint John than in either of these communities. The health experts I’ve spoken to say that existing regulations for air pollution as inadequate. Yet TransCanada says air pollution from Energy East would not be significant.

I’m worried about the prospect of a spill or fire at the tank storage farm.

The deputy fire chief in Burnaby, B.C., has issued a scathing report on the risks presented by a similar oil tank storage facility on the West Coast. The chief warned that a fire at the expanded tank farm could create a “nightmare scenario” resulting in a massive urban evacuation.

I am having trouble trusting TransCanada and Irving Oil. Despite several requests, TransCanada has refused to hold a public meeting with Red Head residents with an open question-and-answer period.

A recent Reuters investigation of the New Brunswick Department of Energy found that since 2012, Irving’s export terminal has experienced at least 19 accidents classified as “environmental emergencies.” In 2013, Irving received a formal warning for taking more than a day to report a storage tank leak at the Canaport facility.

According to National Energy Board statistics, TransCanada has had more pipeline ruptures than any other company in Canada. The company’s electronic monitoring equipment won’t even detect a spill that is less than 1.5 per cent of the pipeline’s capacity. This means over 2 million litres can spill before anyone is alerted.

My concerns don’t stop at the end of my driveway.

The Energy East project would see 115 oil tankers in the Bay of Fundy — and potentially far more now that the Cacouna, Quebec, port has been cancelled. The endangered North Atlantic right whales in the Bay of Fundy are already vulnerable to ship strikes and low-frequency ship noise, both of which Energy East threatens to worsen. Moving in and out of port for export, Energy East tankers would carry 1 to 2 million barrels of oil each.

Energy East would ship diluted bitumen from the tar sands. Sticky and heavy, bitumen from Alberta’s tar sands separated from the diluents (chemicals) and sunk in Michigan’s Kalamazoo River during a pipeline spill in 2010. This cost Enbridge more than $1 billion to clean up, yet submerged oil remains on the river bed to this day.

One federal study found diluted bitumen sunk and formed “tar balls” in marine conditions similar to the Bay of Fundy. A major spill that occurs during loading of the tankers or when the tankers are leaving wouldn’t just threaten whales. It could be a serious blow for all ocean-dependent economies and jobs.

A draft federal report accessed through freedom of information admits that not enough is known about the potential toxic effects of tar sands crude in our waterways. Energy East passes through or comes near more than 300 waterways, including at least six of the St. John River’s main tributaries.

I want to do my part in helping protect future generations.

The Energy East pipeline would create more climate pollution than any single Atlantic province.

A recent scientific report says 85 per cent of Canada’s tar sands need to stay in the ground if we are to avoid the worst of climate change. Industry wants to double production by 2030 and will pursue both pipeline and rail expansion to export their product. Filling the Energy East pipeline would allow a close to 40 per cent increase in tar sands production.

We can do better. This export pipeline puts so much at risk for such short-term benefit. There is much more at stake than profit.

Le 4 juin 2015

Pour diffusion immédiate

Lancement de l’Éco-bottin du N-B en l’honneur de la Journée mondiale de l’environnement

button Ecobottin
Moncton – À l’occasion de la Journée mondiale de l’environnement, le Réseau environnemental du Nouveau-Brunswick (RENB) lance l’Éco-bottin, un bottin consultable en ligne regroupant plus de 80 groupes environnementaux sans but lucratif du Nouveau-Brunswick.

« L’Éco-bottin est un « Qui est qui » des enjeux environnementaux au Nouveau-Brunswick. Ce bottin permet à la population de toute la province de se connecter avec les groupes environnementaux de leur région, » déclare Raïssa Marks, directrice générale du RENB. « Nous lançons ce bottin durant la Journée mondiale de l’environnement pour inviter tous les Néobrunswickois à faire un pas en avant et à joindre un groupe de leur région. »

On peut trouver des groupes environnementaux fondés dans leurs collectivités partout dans la province. Ces groupes travaillent fort pour protéger et restaurer l’environnement, et pour former la population, mais aussi pour avoir du plaisir dans la nature et partager cette joie. « On peut retrouver huit clubs affiliés à Nature NB dans la province, » fait remarquer Vanessa Roy-MacDougall de Nature NB, un groupe membre du réseau environnemental, » et l’Éco-bottin va aider la population à s’engager avec nous. »

« L’Éco-bottin va se révéler très utiles pour les jeunes comme moi qui s’intéressent aux enjeux environnementaux, » ajoute Chloé Mélanson de Vertige, un groupe environnemental d’élèves de l’école secondaire Mathieu-Martin. « Ce sera maintenant tellement facile de trouver un groupe pour faire du bénévolat et participer à ses activités.

« L’Éco-bottin va aider les individus à s’impliquer davantage dans les enjeux environnementaux, et ce dans leur collectivité locale, » souligne Amanda Marlin de EOS Éco-Énergie de la région de Tantramar. « Quels que soient leurs intérêts environnementaux et quel que soit l’endroit où ils se trouvent, les Néobrunswickois sont maintenant capables de trouver un groupe qui leur convient. »

« Il est surprenant de trouver plus de 80 groupes environnementaux fondés dans leur collectivité dans une petite province comme la nôtre. À mon avis, c’est parce que nous sommes essentiellement une province rurale et les gens y développent des liens profonds avec la terre et leur collectivité; ils veulent tous les préserver et les protéger. Pour le RENB, appuyer ce mouvement pour préserver et protéger la nature est l’essence de notre mission, » précise Marks. « L’Éco-bottin va fournir un lien significatif. Quel enjeu vous tient à cœur? Utiliser l’Éco-bottin pour trouver d’autres personnes qui pensent comme vous. »

L’Éco-bottin est consultable par nom d’organisation ou acronyme, par enjeu environnemental abordé, par localité et par étendue géographique et langue de service. Pour chacun des groupes, on retrouve des renseignements pour les contacter, ainsi que leurs buts, leurs activités et les services qu’ils offrent au public. On retrouve l’Éco-bottin au

Le Réseau environnemental du Nouveau-Brunswick, fondé en 1991, est un réseau de communication composé d’organisations à but non lucratif et en environnement au Nouveau-Brunswick. Sa mission est d’encourager et faciliter le maillage et la communication entre les groupes membres afin de faire avancer leurs efforts de protection de la Terre et de promouvoir des modes de vie écologiquement sains et renforcer le mouvement écologique au Nouveau-Brunswick.

— 30 —
Raissa Marks, Réseau environnemental du Nouveau-Brunswick, bureau : 506-855-4144, cellulaire : 506-588-2980
Biologist Rod Cumberland sent this letter to all members of the NB Legislative Assembly


I have just reviewed the 323 page Health Canada re-assessment of glyphosate. It was due in 2014 but was completed April 13, 2015.

Rather than simply take whatever comes out of this process at face value, I believe you need to be informed of the pitfalls of this present review.

It is VERY evident that there are huge problems with this process and I would like to make you aware of them before we blindly assume that this review is unbiased and "scientific". Please allow me to elaborate on my two main shortfalls of this review:

First - There is an obvious lack of relevant research; and
(Without recent and relevant research that CLEARLY reveals numerous health and wildlife hazards associated with glyphosate, the assumptions that it is safe are erroneous).

Second - the inclusion of the economic and social benefits of glyphosate.
This document presumes to use “a science-based approach”, therefore this is no place for economic and social benefits that have little relevance when considering the science behind the impacts and safety of a compound to human health.
The shortcomings of this review are as follows:

1. The Health Canada review of glyphosate has not considered the actual product sprayed and used across Canada with the adjuvants and emulsifiers that make it the effective product it is – If glyphosate was used by itself for the benefits purported in both agriculture and forest based applications, then a review considering the impacts of glyphosate alone may be appropriate. However, the effectiveness of this compound is only possible in formulation. It is therefore the FORMULATION that must be considered in the review of glyphosate because indeed, this is what is sprayed across the country, not glyphosate alone.

2. This review has not included volumes of recent worldwide literature that reveals huge issues with glyphosate in formulation. In any scientific review, literature review or published paper, the strength of the paper is only as relevant as the research upon which it is based. In other words, using outdated and short-term studies on a compound that has been continually modified and that has long term consequences is either knowingly biasing the process and results, or worse, pleading ignorance to the advancement of science and emerging research. Neither is appropriate in this re-evaluation and this process relies on outdated, short-term research when long term and relevant research is readily available that shows markedly different results than they report.

For example, 78% of all industry-supplied research is between 10 and 40 years outdated. Further, the majority of these (a full 80%) are more than 15 years removed from currently published material. I forwarded (and have appended here) over 30 papers published within the past 10 years on glyphosate and glyphosate formulations that suggest markedly different results and reveal glyphosate and its formulations are the cause of many modern human diseases, are carcinogenic and are the cause of cell malformations in numerous types of human and animal cells, but most problematic are its problems associated with gastrointestinal systems and reproductive cells specifically. And the review doesn’t even begin to address all the relevant research on GMO’s and their problems.

Discouragingly, but likely explanatory to the present proposed conclusion is that a mere 9% of the papers used in the review are recent publications. I do not understand on such a controversial topic as glyphosate use and it’s proven health concerns why more effort was not expended to find current research from around the globe to give a much better review of this chemical. It would definitely impact this assessment. This very biased approach is clearly covered in Antoniou 2012.

I would also like to comment on several specific concerns within the document:

a) On page 3 it states that “pesticides are registered for use in Canada only if the level of exposure does not cause any harmful effects”. Therefore, if there is current research that DOES show harmful effects, particularly of a chemical in the state it is sprayed in throughout the country, by their own admission it MUST NOT recommend it for use. I contend that the attached research is clear evidence that the decision must be reversed.

b) Glyphosate formulations pose negligible risk to freshwater fish and amphibians. This conclusion has been proven incorrect by modern research (Annett 2014, Vera 2010). It shows harmful effects and would invoke a nation-wide ban on the use of glyphosate.

c) Under 3.1 it is stated that studies were available to satisfy data requirements, yet it is not specified what these requirements are, nor what studies are applicable, when they were done, etc. to justify these statement. This is poor science and format for a review document with the intent of public review, unless of course the intent is to limit the amount of intelligent and scientific comment.

d) Cardiovascular malformations are mentioned on page 14 as serious side effects in one study (again, no specifics) but regardless, how can it be concluded that glyphosate is safe? Once again, these results disagree with the suggestion that glyphosate “does not cause harmful effects” and would rather corroborate modern research linking glyphosate and its formulations to a huge list of environmental, human and wildlife ill effects (research attached).

e) Dietary exposure can be mitigated by changes in use patterns. This begs two questions – if there are no harmful effects, why suggest mitigation? Next, mitigation is suggested, this implies harmful effects. More Problems are that this document does not suggest how these mitigative steps will be enforced to ensure compliance. Therefore, it is a hollow recommendation that affords NO protection of health.

f) On page 29 “major incidents of human exposure” are reported, however, no qualification is provided for the word “major”. Further, these exposures to “Highly toxic ingredients” or the adjuvants and emulsifiers I suggest MUST be considered. This again highlights that some of their research, along with most modern research, that glyphosate in formulation is HIGHLY TOXIC. Back to point 1 – how can such a review conclude glyphosate does not cause harmful effects unless on the grounds of semantics by separating glyphosate from its formulations, a formulation that is rarely used commercially??

g) On page 30 they reference common incidents in wild animals where these formulations cause death in wildlife. Once again, totally contradicting statements and research that suggests this assessment is incorrect and will jeopardize human, wildlife and environmental health and safety. How could a toxic substance causing death NOT warrant changes in labels at the least, or more responsibly a ban on the product?

h) The statement “Glyphosate is rarely detected in drinking water” proves the weakness and ignorance of the process and data. I include papers that show glyphosate, even at residual levels, shows up in soil, water, human urine, cattle tissue, other cells, etc. Therefore, based on modern research the present suggested evaluation must be reconsidered in light of science.

i) You assume “risk to mammals is low”. Again, research from Montana, Australia, Denmark, Germany and Egypt directly linked malformations in ungulates to the mineral chelating effect that glyphosate has and the resulting mineral deficiencies in their food and systems from the use of glyphosate; More erroneous data, more erroneous conclusions.

j) This review states there is no reproductive risk to glyphosate. Current research again proves this point outdated and erroneous (see attached research).

k) This review states glyphosate has no effect on fish. The appended research proves that herbicides are endocrine disruptors (which glyphosate is) and federal research scientists have proven they cause many problems in fish including high at-sea mortality.

l) Quite disturbing is the assertion on page 42 that one of the benefits of glyphosate is its ability to be more effective when combined with other chemicals. It is hypocritical to in one breath dismiss the impacts of glyphosate in formation because only the compound glyphosate is being reviewed, yet when it’s convenient, this very argument is used to weigh the scales in favour of the compound.

m) The wordsmithing in the section referencing OECD countries not prohibiting ALL uses of glyphosate is correct only grammatically. For the record, there are municipalities within Canada, Provinces within Canada and many countries that have prohibited the use of glyphosate (Columbia and Holland in the past few weeks) due to the health hazards and risks you purport are not present. Interesting play on words, but in no way reflects reality and concerns around this compound. Statements like these drip with bias, and ignorance – whether purposeful or not – to current research.

n) Maximum levels in foods – this raises another point that MUST be considered by Health Canada. In light of emerging research and glyphosates link to modern disease, it is Health Canada’s responsibility to request labels on all foods that have been sprayed at one point or another in the growth process by glyphosate so the public can protect themselves from ingestion of this substance. If the use of this toxic chemical is not revoked, at the very least there must be a means by which the public can make informed decisions on the purchase of these contaminated foods.

o) If the only change from Health Canada’s former review of glyphosate is several labeling changes, how does Health Canada ensure these label instructions are followed? What are the penalties for failure to heed them? Once again, this is a broken system and in NO WAY protects the health and welfare of humans, wildlife or the environment. These are serious deficiencies in this review and therefore, we cannot be expected to take this re-evaluation seriously.

In closing, I was very disappointed with this re-assessment. This appears another bureaucratic process that only provides lip service and opportunity for input just to say it was done. I would hope and expect that the elected politicians of New Brunswick would take these comments seriously and ensure such a biased and ill-informed review in light of applicable and relevant literature of glyphosate’s great risk to public health, wildlife health and the environment would step up and demand a more rigorous approach.

If NB companies, or the BNBDNR, NBAFA or other NB departments stand behind this biased and flawed review, you will be knowingly allowing the poisoning of New Brunswickers.

In all sincerity,
Rod E. Cumberland, CWB
Le rapport de l'atelier "Suivre le courant: un atelier pour les groupes sur les bassins versants du N.-B" qui a eu lieu le 21 janvier 2015 est maintenant disponible pour tous les membres et associés du RENB dans la Bibliothèque de reférences de notre site web (sous l'onglet "Ressources"). 

L’évènement a attiré des représentants de 24 groupes sur les bassins versants et de sept autres organismes environnementaux. Ceci représente 75% des groupes sur les bassins versants dans la province. Ils ont identifié quatre domaines prioritaires sur lesquels ils aimeraient travailler ensemble:

·         Stratégie de communication efficiente et efficace;

·        Stratégie de financement à long terme;

·         Coordination des données receuillies et surveillance;

·         Encourager l’achèvement du cadre de la politique des eaux au Nouveau-Brunswick (y inclus la règlementation de la classification des eaux.) 

Un gros merci à tous  participants  ainsi qu'à Small Change Fund pour avoir rendu cet évènement possible. Il y a du travail intéressant à l'horizon!

Bonne lecture.
Water Declaration
Peace and Friendship Alliance, Red Head 2015

We, the members of the Alliance, recognize the Nation-to-Nation Peace and Friendship Treaties as the basis of our common ground, defining our responsibilities to the water and to each other, down through the generations.

We affirm that Water is the dynamic and creative element that sustains all life. Water moves and flows through deep aquifers, springs, bogs, brooks, marshes, lakes, rivers and into the ocean tides throughout Wabanaki territory, to be drawn up into the clouds and fall as rain, returning to the land.

In this constant ebb & flow, Water nourishes & cleanses the entire world. It makes up who we are, as well as the other living beings. We live, grow, play, work, wash, cook, drink, rest, pray and celebrate with the waters. What we do to the Water, we do to ourselves.

Water is limited, and it is vulnerable. It needs to be protected, and shared freely and fairly. Water is not a commodity or merely a resource. It is a unique condition, a life giver, a right, and water is a dynamic being with a creative power of its own unlike any other in the natural world, and the human family.

We see the destruction of the environment as the destruction of ourselves. We see that any assault on the good and well-being of our relations in the natural world, upon our lands and our waters as an act of aggression against us.

Today, we recognize and resist the extensive abuses to Water that resource industries and governments are unleashing, directly assaulting Water.

These threats include:

● fracking ● tar sands pipelines ● mining ● industrial wastewater dumping ● privatizing water services ● clear cut & spraying in the forest ● industrial farming ● river dams ● coastal inundation and flash flooding from severe storms and climate change ● nuclear power generation ● salmon farm mismanagement ● government inaction

These abuses render water toxic, diverted, substandard, unreliable and unavailable. All of these assaults on Water are abusive to the web of life which our societies are embedded in and depend upon to survive and thrive for the next seven generations. Our children and grandchildren deserve better and need to be protected from harm.

The Peace and Friendship Alliance opposes these abuses. We are committed to restoring balance to our relationship with the water, thereby renewing our treaty responsibilities to each other as distinct Nations. When we care for the water, we care for each other.

We will care for the water by building a sustainable economy that rapidly transitions away from fossil-fuels to renewables, restores our forests, reduces the carbon footprint, decentralizes energy supply, and builds food security through a regional biodiverse farming sector.

We call on governments to amend our laws and regulations to accommodate the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. lThese laws and regulations must take into account sovereign aboriginal title of Wolastoqiyik (Maliseet), Passamaquoddy and Mi’kmaq, involving their inherent and inalienable rights, including among others their right to exercise free, prior, and informed consent and their right to participate in economic development that affects the waters in their lands. These laws and regulations must also take into account the balance of interests involving the farming sector, forestry sector, renewable energy sector, manufacturing sector, as well as health services and tourism industries among others.

We the Alliance invite you to join in our movement – our shared consciousness - to reconnect in a sacred manner to the natural world. Our Nations will stand shoulder-to- shoulder to protect the water and secure a future for our children and our grandchildren.

This Water Declaration is declared in Peace and Friendship, on the 30th of May, 2015, at the mouth of the Wolastoq (Saint John River) and the shore of the Bay of Fundy.

The Peace and Friendship Alliance

woliwon - wela’lin - thank you - merci

Bonjour à tous,

Les subventions de projets du Fonds en fiducie pour l'Environnement sont annoncées!

On se croise les doigts pour vous!

L'équipe du RENB

Provinces take lead on climate protection

FREDERICTON — The declaration from premiers at the Quebec Summit on Climate Change puts momentum behind the effort to protect our climate and reduce carbon pollution, says the Executive Director of the Conservation Council of New Brunswick.

Yesterday the premiers released a declaration containing several commitments for greater cooperation and meaningful action to curb climate change. The 12-point declaration included commitments from premiers to transition to a lower-carbon economy, noting that could involve carbon pricing, and putting policies in place to reduce climate change-causing pollution, such as increasing energy efficiency and conservation and using clean and renewable energy.

“Tuesday’s announcement from our premiers is the type of leadership on climate that Canadians have been looking for,” said Lois Corbett, Executive Director of the Conservation Council. "Of course, now they have to take action at home to reduce pollution — actions that their citizens support and will create jobs."

In the declaration, the premiers said they recognize the cost of inaction is greater than the cost of acting on climate protection, and that the fight against climate change would create sustainable, long-term jobs, especially in areas such as renewable energy and energy efficiency.

The document comes just one day after Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne announced her province would enter into a cap and trade system with Quebec and California as a means to control carbon pollution, and following this weekend’s massive march in Quebec City where 25,000 people called on leaders to act now on climate protection.

“To me, this is our premiers saying to the Canadian people: message received. Our provinces are now empowered to act, and we expect that they will,” added Corbett, who attended the climate march and presented at an Act On Climate Forum in Quebec City over the weekend.

Corbett said the commitments contained in the declaration meant good things for New Brunswick, noting efforts to reduce carbon pollution - such as investments in energy conservation, renewable energy projects, putting a price on carbon and phasing out coal - will create good jobs for New Brunswickers and make our communities healthier places to live.

The climate summit was hosted in Quebec City and attended by eight provincial premiers, including New Brunswick Premier Brian Gallant. Gallant led a New Brunswick delegation which included Environment and Local Government Minister Brian Kenny and Fredericton South MLA David Coon.

Read the declaration from premiers.


FREDERICTON — Lois Corbett, Executive Director of the Conservation Council of New Brunswick, will talk about ways governments can protect our climate while creating prosperous communities during the Act on Climate Forum in Quebec City this weekend.

Corbett is one of several notable speakers participating in the Act on Climate Forum on Sunday, April 12 in Quebec City. The forum follows the Act on Climate March being organized on April 11, when Canadians from coast-to-coast will gather to show their support for government action on climate protection.

Later in the week, some of Canada’s premiers, including New Brunswick Premier Brian Gallant, will be in Quebec City for a special meeting on climate change. The march and forum are intended to show leaders how serious Canadians are about coming up with climate solutions in the lead up to the international climate talks in Paris later this year.

“It’s all about solutions for that week in Quebec City,” says Corbett, who will speak on federal and provincial laws and policies at the forum. "Premiers agreeing to act together to manage carbon pollution at home and invest in the new jobs found in clean energy and improved energy efficiency will send a strong signal that they, like most Canadians, respect that there is a limit to the amount of carbon pollution the atmosphere can take.”

Corbett, an expert in public policy, will talk about ways our leaders can move fairly and effectively toward an economy that doesn’t depend on fossil fuels.

Other speakers of the Act on Climate Forum include representatives from Canadian universities, the Canadian Labour Congress, labour unions, First Nations, citizen groups and environmental organizations such as the David Suzuki Foundation and Blue Green Canada, among others.

The forum aims to strengthen collaboration between groups across Canada who are working to tackle climate change.

Corbett will be available to media in New Brunswick for on-the-street interviews from Quebec City during the March on Saturday or following the Forum on Sunday.



FREDERICTON — A new poll shows New Brunswickers want their government leaders to act now to protect the climate.

Polling determined an overwhelming majority of New Brunswickers — a margin of nearly 8 to 1 — believe we should be global leaders in protecting the climate by reducing our energy consumption.

The national telephone poll was conducted in the last half of March, just weeks before several Canadian premiers, including New Brunswick Premier Brian Gallant, are gathering in Quebec City for a special meeting on climate change.

The poll also shows New Brunswickers don’t buy into the idea that just because a jurisdiction is small it doesn’t have to take as much action to curb climate change. A majority of New Brunswickers rejected the notion that Canada’s efforts on climate change should be minimal given our country’s total emissions as compared to other polluters such as the U.S. or China.

Instead, New Brunswickers want swift action on climate protection from their leaders. Polling shows 73.3 per cent of people from the province want to see a plan for creating jobs in the renewable energy sector, with 70.2 per cent calling for a promise to legally enforce a cap or limits to carbon pollution. Nearly 70 per cent of New Brunswickers want a commitment to phase out coal, oil and gas and replace them with renewable energy sources.

The national random sample telephone poll involved participation from 3,040 Canadians and was conducted for Climate Action Network Canada by Oracle Research Limited between March 12 to 30. The margin of error for the total 3040-person survey is +/- 1.78%, 19/20 times. See full results here.

Other results related to New Brunswick:

  • 78.7 per cent of New Brunswickers see curbing climate change as a moral issue, saying they believe they are morally obligated to reduce carbon pollution in their daily lives;

  • 63.5 per cent of New Brunswickers disagree with the notion that cheap and accessible energy are more important than the negative impacts they have on the environment;

  • 80 per cent of New Brunswickers want a say in decision-making around energy projects.
Quand Mary Ann a commencé à travailler au Réseau environnemental du Nouveau-Brunswick en 1991, elle n’avait aucune idée de l’allure qu’aurait cette organisation 24 années plus tard. Du simple réseau qui tentait de relier les organisations environnementales du Nouveau-Brunswick, celui-ci s’est développé pour devenir une organisation qui joue un rôle essentiel pour réunir les personnes autour des enjeux les plus brulants pour développer des stratégies et poser des actions concrètes. De plus, le RENB rassemble aussi une grande variété de personnes, d’agences et d’organisations pour s’occuper de lacunes spécifiques qu’elles réalisent ne pas pouvoir résoudre par elles-mêmes. Alors aujourd’hui, le RENB, avec deux employées à temps plein, deux autres à temps partiel et quelques entrepreneurs, gère les communications parmi les groupes environnementaux dont notamment quatre caucus actifs au sujet des gaz de schiste, des terres de la Couronne, des bassins versants et de l’oléoduc et 4 collectifs multipartites (la santé des enfants et de l’environnement, l’éducation à la viabilité, l’adaptation aux changements climatiques et la biodiversité), qui regroupent 18 équipes ou groupes de travail. C’est cet ensemble qui compose le Réseau environnemental aujourd’hui et qui représente une approche très particulière pour traiter des questions et des préoccupations environnementales dans la province, toujours en se fondant sur l’établissement de réseaux et de communications.

Mary Ann a insufflé au Réseau environnemental une vision à la fois fondée sur la base tout en considérant toutes situations d’une manière stratégique afin de renforcer la capacité de notre mouvement environnemental. Mary Ann est une activiste, une stratège et une fondatrice…et nous tous de la communauté environnementale ont pu bénéficier de son dévouement et de son engagement et nous l’en remercions chaleureusement.

On May 30th, let's show Canada and the world that Red Head is "the end of the line" for Energy East

By Mark D'Arcy, New Brunswick Energy East campaigner, The Council of Canadians

Cacuna stopped it. South Portland stopped it. Now it is Red Head's turn to stand up against the tarsands pipeline.

As attention on Energy East now focuses on New Brunswick and the Bay of Fundy, the residents of Red Head are well into their second month of planning for the large "End of the Line March" on Saturday, May 30th @ 1:00pm.

Why is the line in the sand being drawn at Red Head? The numbers speak for themselves:

• a 42-inch diameter export pipeline built over 280 proposed waterway crossings in New Brunswick (see this interactive map);
• a 150-hectare tank farm capable of housing 7.6 million barrels of oil and heated bitumen will be situated right in the middle of the rural community of Red Head;
• a 183-hectare marine terminal complex at Red Head;
• supertankers carrying 2.2 million barrels of oil crossing over the Bay of Fundy; and
• pipeline leaks as large as 2.6 million litres per day for up to 2 weeks could go undetected;

The threat of spills into waterways and the Bay of Fundy, and certain toxic air pollution for Red Head, is unacceptable.

Continue reading here: Red Head is "the end of the line" for Energy East

Event Facebook Page:March to the End of the Line

NBEN event page: March To The End Of The Line

Council of Canadians Energy East page
 © 2018 NBEN / RENB