Force of Nature -- Ontario -- 2009 04 21 -- 9-11 Era -- Axis of Environmental Evil -- Trillium --...

8/8/2019 Force of Nature -- Ontario -- 2009 04 21 -- 9-11 Era -- Axis of Environmental Evil -- Trillium -- Toronto -- MODIFIED --

1/15

PPaarrtt 33..


2/15

PPaarrtt 33..

2211//0044//22000099

William H. Gathercole & Norah G. [email protected] Force of Nature Media Report.

2 http://www.barbneal.com/ysam.htm

>

The GREENSPACE INDUSTRY had better say its prayers too, now thatpest control products are being prohibited in the PROVINCE OFONTARIO by THE AXIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVIL as ofApril 22nd , 2009.


3/15

PPaarrtt 33..

2211//0044//22000099


3

TThhee AAxxiiss OOff EEnnvviirroonnmmeennttaall EEvviill ..

The GOVERNMENT OFONTARIO , in collaboration with their allies inthe ENVIRONMENTAL MOVEMENT , and the organizations that fund environ-mental advocacy, constitute THE AXIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVIL , whichovertly threatens to annihilate the GREEN SPACE INDUSTRY with prohibi-tions on pest control products, like the one enacted in Ontario on April 22nd ,2009.

More precisely, THE AXIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVIL can be defined bythe three following organizations.

The ENVIRONMENTAL MOVEMENT itself, with its special interest groups

that operate as distinct entities.

The organizations that are a source of funding for the ENVIRONMENTAL

MOVEMENT.

The political parties and governments that collaborate with the ENVIRON-MENTAL MOVEMENT by instituting environmental public policy.


4/15

PPaarrtt 33..

2211//0044//22000099


4

EEnnvviirroonnmmeennttaall ppuubblliicc ppoolliiccyy..

Environmental public policy is defined as the course of action taken bya government regarding issues, such as the environment, human health,and of course, pest control products. In cases like the legislation of the On-tario COSMETIC PESTICIDES BAN ACT , public policy has been adopted forone or several of the following reasons.

To address the loss of confidence in the federal regulatory process.

To fulfill a promise stating that a prohibition would be implemented.

To intervene due to the turf industrys apparent inability to selfregulate.

To reduce the perceived or potential harmful effects on the public.

To respond to pressure from environmentalists and their groups.

Throughout this document, some people will be named as CULPRITS.This is not an accusation of any legal wrongdoing. All CULPRITS are sim-ply being held accountable for changes in public policy that have been detri-mental to the GREENSPACE INDUSTRY. Even though each of these peopleis an adversary, each still deserves our respect.


5/15

PPaarrtt 33..

2211//0044//22000099


5

TThhee PPrroovviinnccee ooffOOnnttaarriioo..

The two following groups are the obvious political/governmentalculprit s that can be held accountable for the legislation of the Ontario COS-METICPESTICIDESBAN ACT .

The ONTARIO L IBERAL PARTY which has formed the GOVERNMENTOF ONTARIO under Premier Dalton McGuinty since the provincial election of2003. It is the party that legislated the prohibition.

The NEW DEMOCRATIC PARTY OF ONTARIO (N.D.P.), which is one oftwo opposition parties in Ontario, and is officially referred to as THE THIRDPARTY. It had previously formed a majority government in 1990. The N.D.P.strongly supports the COSMETIC PESTICIDESBAN ACT , and condemns the

golf course exception to the act.

The ONTARIO PC PARTY , formally known as the PROGRESSIVECONSERVATIVE PARTY OFONTARIO, is officially referred to as THE OFFICIALOPPOSITION PARTY . Its attitude has been lukewarm towards the COS-METICPESTICIDESBAN ACT .

Throughout this document, some people will be named as CULPRITS.

This is not an accusation of any legal wrong

doing. All CULPRITS are sim-ply being held accountable for changes in public policy that conspired to pro-hibit pest control products to the detriment of the GREENSPACEINDUSTRY.


6/15

PPaarrtt 33..

2211//0044//22000099


6

Dalton McGuinty.Premier of Ontario.The Premier witha biology degree.

[email protected]

John Gerretsen.Minister

of the Environment(with a friend).

[email protected]


7/15

PPaarrtt 33..

2211//0044//22000099


7

TThhee OOnnttaarriioo TTrriilllliiuumm FFoouunnddaattiioonn

((OO..TT..FF..))..

Trillium is a member of the ONTARIOENVIRONMENTNETWORK . It is also afinancialsh ie ld agency created by the GOVERNMENT OFONTARIO to provide direct funding to organiza-tions in the ENVIRONMENTAL MOVEMENT .This situation represents one of the great deceptive practices of our soci-ety. Government money acquired from honest and hardworking people inthe GREEN SPACE INDUSTRY are refunnelled through Trillium to culpritsthat promote and plot for their annihilation.

For example, since 1999, WORLDWILDLIFEFUND OFCANADA (W.W.F.)alone has been provided with almost onequarter of a million dollars by Trillium. Thanks to the generosity of Trillium, W.W.F. had the meansand/or the infrastructure to legally challenge the GREEN SPACE INDUS-TRY in the HudsonSupremeCourt affair. As we all know, on June 28 t h ,2001, THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA unfortunately upheld the bylawenacted by the TOWN OF HUDSON which prohibited the use of pest controlproducts for the PROFESSIONAL LAWN CARE INDUSTRY and DOITYOURSELFHOMEOWNERS. Agriculture and golf clubs were exempted.


8/15

PPaarrtt 33..

2211//0044//22000099


8

Robin Cardozo.Chief Executive Officer.

[email protected]

ONTARIO TRILLIUM FOUNDATION (O.T.F.) is a financialshield for the GOVERNMENT OF ONTARIO . The McGuinty regimehas used it for supplying vast amounts of funds to the E N V I R O N - M E N T A L M O V E M E N T .


9/15

PPaarrtt 33..

2211//0044//22000099


9

TThhee eennvviirroonnmmeennttaall mmoovveemmeenntt

aanndd aaccttiivviisstt ssttrraatteeggiieess..

Changes in public policy have traditionally been accomplished by im-plementing one or several of the following activist strategies

Advertising.

Civil disobedience.

Demonstrations.

Discreditation.

Education.

Intimidation.

Litigation.

Lobbying.

Media advocacy. Political support.

Protests.

Recruitment, especially of young people.

Threats.

The militant portion of the ENVIRONMENTAL MOVEMENT is centered onecology, health, and human rights. Predictably, the membership of the ENVI-RONMENTAL MOVEMENT tends to include the following types of people.

Health professionals.

Laymen predenting to be professionals.

Legal professionals.

Ordinary citizens.


10/15

PPaarrtt 33..

2211//0044//22000099


10

Many health and legal professionals in the ENVIRONMENTAL MOVE-MENT have purported to be EXPERTS in the field of pest control productsand the maintenance of green spaces. Under close scrutiny, none appear tohave any credentials as true EXPERTS in these matters. Otherwise, many EXPERTS have displayed their EXPERTISE and influence by using the fol-lowing game plan.

Arguing that ORGANIC maintenance practices are more effective and

lowerrisk compared to the conventional ones.

Demonstrating that environmental goals are more important than meregreen space aesthetics (i.e. cosmetic turf standards).

Encouraging local public regulatory bylaws banning pest control products

that will inevitably lead to provincial regulatory action, and even a nation

wide prohibition.

Initiating prohibitions against the PROFESSIONAL LAWN CARE INDUSTRY

that will inevitably lead to prohibitions against the GOLF COURSE INDUS-

TRY and Agriculture.

Pointing out that the makers and users of conventional pest control products

are malevolent and untrustworthy.

Scaremongering with claims that it is better to err on the side of caution

when making public policy concerning pest control products.

Showing that environmentalists are perpetually unhappy with any related

conventional policy concerning the environment and pest control products.

Warning repeatedly of the looming of catastrophe that requires immediate

and drastic attention.


11/15

PPaarrtt 33..

2211//0044//22000099


11

TThhee ggrroouuppss..

In the past decade, there have been over seventyfive environmentalgroups, or nests of environmental activity, that have pursued the matter of in-fluencing public policy regarding pest control products in Ontario. Of allthese groups, eighteen are the most prominent culprits that can be held ac-countable for the legislation of the COSMETICPESTICIDESBAN ACT .

CANADIANASSOCIATION OFPHYSICIANS FOR THEENVIRONMENT (C.A.P.E.).

CANADIANCANCERSOCIETY (C.C.S.).

CANADIANCOALITION FORHEALTH ANDENVIRONMENT (C.C.H.E.).

CANADIANENVIRONMENTAL LAW ASSOCIATION (C.E.L.A.).

CANADIAN INSTITUTE FORENVIRONMENTAL LAW ANDPOLICY (C.I.E.L.A.P.).

CANADIANPARTNERSHIP FORCHILDRENS HEALTH ANDENVIRONMENT (C.P.C.H.E.)

CHILDRENS HOSPITAL OFEASTERNONTARIO (C.H.E.O.).

CITY OFTORONTO.

DAVIDSUZUKIFOUNDATION.

ECOJUSTICECANADA .

ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCECANADA .

ORGANICLANDSCAPEALLIANCE (O.L.A.).

PESTICIDEFREE ONTARIO (P.F.O.).

PREVENTCANCERNOW .

REGISTEREDNURSESASSOCIATION OFONTARIO (R.N.A.O.).

SIERRA CLUB OFCANADA .

THE COALITION FOR A HEALTHYOTTAWA (C.H.O.).

THE ONTARIOCOLLEGE OFFAMILYPHYSICIANS (O.C.F.P.).


12/15

PPaarrtt 33..

2211//0044//22000099


12

CCiittyy ooffTToorroonnttoo..

Yes. The CITY OFTORONTO is a nest of activity forthe ENVIRONMENTAL MOVEMENT . In 2003, the CITY OFTORONTO passed a bylaw restricting the outdoor use ofpest control products. Torontos elected officials apparently accepted theprinciples related to POLITICIZED SCIENCE for justifying its bylaw, whichwas challenged in court by CROPL IF E CANADA .

In 1987, the CITY OF TORONTO established the ENVIRONMENTALPROTECTIONOFFICE (E.P.O.) of TORONTOPUBLICHEALTH. This was doneto respond to growing community and political concerns about the impact ofenvironmental contaminants on human health. E.P.O. is the largest publichealth unit in Canada.

The ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION OFFICE has forged close alli-ances with CANADIAN ASSOCIATION OFPHYSICIANS FOR THEENVIRONMENT

(C.A.P.E.), CANADIAN PARTNERSHIP FOR CHILDREN'S HEALTH AND ENVIRON-MENT (C.P.C.H.E), and ORGANIC LANDSCAPE ALLIANCE (O.L.A.). All sup-port the COSMETICPESTICIDESBAN ACT .

C.A.P.E. and C.P.C.H.E. are tandem organizations.

In 2002, the CITY OF TORONTO used ORGANIC LANDSCAPE ALLI-ANCE (O.L.A.) to support its prohibition on pest control products. O.L.A. pro-vided an apparently exclusive advisory service to create a socalled OR-GANIC LAWN CARE PROGRAM.

Torontos ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION OFFICE (E.P.O.) uses apub-lic affairs shield which is called COALITION FOR PESTICIDE REFORM ON-TARIO. This shield allows E.P.O. to influence public policy regarding COS-METIC PESTICIDES despite the fact that E.P.O. is supposed to be a nonpartisan agency that is not mandated for this kind of activity.


13/15

PPaarrtt 33..

2211//0044//22000099


13

The following people remunerated by the CITY OF TORONTO are theculprits that can be held accountable for supporting the banning of pest con-trol products, to the detriment of the GREEN SPACE INDUSTRY . If there

had been no Toronto ban, if Toronto staff had not supported the ban, there would not have been an Ontar io prohibi tion. Several em-ployees of the CITY OF TORONTO have utilized time and energy, at the taxpayers expense, to forge public policy that conspired to prohibit pest controlproducts.

Arthur Beauregard. Manager Natural Environment and Horticulture.Parks and Recreation Division. Economic Development, Culture, and Tourism.

[email protected]

Monica Campbell. Manager. Health Promotion and Environmental

Protection. Toronto Public [email protected]

Karen Clark. Supervisor. Environmental Health Assessment & Pol-icy. Planning & Policy. Toronto Public Health. Formerly Staff Member. CA-NADIAN INSTITUTE FORENVIRONMENTAL LAW ANDPOLICY.

Ron de Burger. Director. Healthy Environments. Toronto PublicHealth.

[email protected]

Jim Hart. Director. Executive [email protected]

Susan Makin. Interim Director. Planning and [email protected]

Brenda Patterson. General Manager. Parks, Forestry, and Recrea-tion.

[email protected]

Fran Scott. Director. Planning and Policy and Associate Medical Offi-cer of Health. Toronto Public Health.

[email protected]

Claire TuckerReid. General Manager. Parks and [email protected]


14/15

PPaarrtt 33..

2211//0044//22000099


14


15/15

PPaarrtt 33..

2211//0044//22000099


15

Force of Nature was launched for continuous transmission on the Internet on January 1st, 2009. It is a se-

ries of enewsletters destined for the Green Space Industry, the environmental movement, politicians,

municipalities, and the media, nationwide across Canada, and parts of the United States. Force of Na-ture is produced in two parts. First. The Media Report itself thatreports on the current events affectingthe future of the Green Space Industry.. Second. Independent Perspective., which is a running commen-

tary, sometimes also of a more technical in nature.

For ce of Nature is the brainchild of William H. Gathercole and his entourage. The opinions ex-

pressed in these enewsletters, even though from an independent perspective, may not reflect those of

everyone in the Gr een Space Indu stry, or Mr. Gathercoles many associates. Be warned ! Mr. Gath-

ercole and his team may sometimes be very irreverent and fearless with these enewsletters.

William H. Gathercole holds a degree in Horticulture from the University of Guelph, and another pure and

applied science degree from McGill University. He has worked in virtually all aspects of the Green Space

Industry, including public affairs, personal safety, and environmental issues. Mr. Gathercole has been aconsultant and instructor for decades. Mr. Gathercole has been following the evolution of environmental

terrorismfor over a quartercentury. His involvement in environmental issues reached a fevered pitch inthe 1990s, when he orchestrated, with others, legal action against unethical and excessive municipal regula-tions restricting the use of pest control products. ( i.e. the Town of Hudson. ) Although he can be accused

of being antienvironmentmovement, he is, in fact, simply a strong advocate for the Green Space Industry.

However, this position has not precluded him from criticizing the industry itself. Nonetheless, his vastknowledge of our long journey with environmental issues is undeniable. ( Hopefully ! ) For many

years, Mr. Gathercole has been a contributing columnist for TURF & Recreation Magazine, Can-

adas Turf and Grounds Maintenance Authority.

All pictures contained in Force of Nature were found somewhere on the Internet. We believe that

they are in the public domain, as either educational tools, industry archives, promotional stills, publicityphotos, or press media stock.

Information presented in Force of Nature has been developed for the education and entertainment

of the reader. The events, characters, companies, and organizations, depicted in this document arenot always fictitious. Any similarity to actual persons, living or dead, may not be coincidental.

The following titles are currently available. (Or, will be available in the near future.) Alberta Pro-hibition. British Columbia Prohibition. Burnaby B.C. Prohibition. Canadian Association of

Physicians for the Environment. David Suzuki Foundation. Death and the Environmental

Movement. Golf and Landscape Trade Industries. Kazimiera Jean Cottam. Kelowna B.C.

Prohibition. New Brunswick Prohibition. Ontario Prohibition. Organic Fertilizers. Pets

and Lawn Care Chemicals. Prince Edward Island Prohibition. Quebec Prohibition. Rich-mond B.C. Prohibition. Saint Catharines Ontario. Salmon Arm B.C. Prohibition. The 9/11

Era of the Green Space Industry. The Failure of Integrated Pest Management. The Wisdom ofthe Solomons. Victoria B.C. Prohibition. White Rock B.C. Prohibition. Wisconsin Fertilizer

Prohibition. AASS KK FF OO RR AA CC OO PP YY OO FF AA NN YY BB AA CC KK II SS SSUU EE TT OO DD AA YY ..

Force of Nature -- Ontario -- 2009 04 21 -- 9-11 Era -- Axis of Environmental Evil -- Trillium --...

Documents

Transcript of Force of Nature -- Ontario -- 2009 04 21 -- 9-11 Era -- Axis of Environmental Evil -- Trillium --...