Going Green is Good for Business, says Nortel CEO
It is imperative that businesses quickly recognize the need for environmentally sound behaviors and match these with good business practices, said Mike Zafirovski said today at FORTUNE's first-ever GREEN Conference in Pasadena, Calif.
The Nortel president and CEO participated in the conference as part of the Canadian company’s ongoing commitment to create products and services that make it possible for enterprises and service providers to be more energy efficient while reducing their carbon footprint. This commitment includes elements of Nortel's data portfolio, which is recognized by The Tolly Group, an independent IT validation service, as the industry's greenest – helping to reduce energy consumption by as much as 50%.
"The integration of environmental responsibility into corporate business models is not only the right thing to do but a necessity for business success," Zafirovski said. "As a businessman, my perspective always starts with a mandate to enhance shareholder value. But even with this as my focus, I strongly believe the time is right for business and society to get together to address today's environmental problems."
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Monday, April 21, 2008
On the Eve of Earth Day, I have a Challenge for You! (52 weeks to a better bank account by going green)
We know the press is all over Earth Day.
How could they miss it?
In the last three decades environmentalism has gone from a loonie leftie concept to mainstream common sense...and rightly so.
Long before recycling became the norm my ma used to take her empty containers to the health food store and re-use the plastic bins, rather than buy a new tub. She was raised on an Irish farm, which is the equivalent of saying that nothing went to waste...how could it with eight children to feed, not including the livestock. (I was also stunned to learn that the store owner at the now-closed St. Clair and Bathurst health food store actually remembered my ma, 20 years later, and recognized me after I spent only five minutes in the store looling for spelt spread...now THAT'S a community relationship!).
Still, my ma instilled in my brother and I a respect for the planet and a respect for the dollar.
Now a new book by money-guru David Bach is out and it professes to appeal to the green capitalist in all of us.
Only half way through (and it's an easy, easy read) and I believe the man might be on to something.
Not that it is revolutionary or new...but it can and does appeal to EVERYONE...not just the environmentalist.
It's a way of respecting our resources, while respecting our earnings...of course...it's right up my alley...because it's underlying message is about responsibility.
Saying this, Mr. Bach has not done all his homework (for example, tip #5 suggests switching to bio-diesel. The problem with this is corn-based ethanol, which is what most of North American bio-diesel is made from, is extremely harmful to the environment...not the fuel itself but the production, shipment and destruction the increasing corn crops are having on the planet, the food supply and the irrigation systems in North America...more on that later). He does, however, provide some good, solid options.
In the next 52 weeks, I will share one option a week....one good option that I glean from either Bach's book or from other tried, tested and true experts. It will be a chance for us to either adopt, change or remove an expensive and wasteful practice from our life and a chance to slowly integrate cost-saving measures that make us more responsible for the rest of our lives.
That first option will start tomorrow on Earth Day.
The rest of the time, I will continue to offer insights and opinions on all matters affecting responsible living: from green initiatives, sad human rights situations, addictions and tools and examples of responsible living in the world today.
And if you have a tip, insight or suggestion, share it...we could all use a little humility by learning to listen.
How could they miss it?
In the last three decades environmentalism has gone from a loonie leftie concept to mainstream common sense...and rightly so.
Long before recycling became the norm my ma used to take her empty containers to the health food store and re-use the plastic bins, rather than buy a new tub. She was raised on an Irish farm, which is the equivalent of saying that nothing went to waste...how could it with eight children to feed, not including the livestock. (I was also stunned to learn that the store owner at the now-closed St. Clair and Bathurst health food store actually remembered my ma, 20 years later, and recognized me after I spent only five minutes in the store looling for spelt spread...now THAT'S a community relationship!).
Still, my ma instilled in my brother and I a respect for the planet and a respect for the dollar.
Now a new book by money-guru David Bach is out and it professes to appeal to the green capitalist in all of us.
Only half way through (and it's an easy, easy read) and I believe the man might be on to something.
Not that it is revolutionary or new...but it can and does appeal to EVERYONE...not just the environmentalist.
It's a way of respecting our resources, while respecting our earnings...of course...it's right up my alley...because it's underlying message is about responsibility.
Saying this, Mr. Bach has not done all his homework (for example, tip #5 suggests switching to bio-diesel. The problem with this is corn-based ethanol, which is what most of North American bio-diesel is made from, is extremely harmful to the environment...not the fuel itself but the production, shipment and destruction the increasing corn crops are having on the planet, the food supply and the irrigation systems in North America...more on that later). He does, however, provide some good, solid options.
In the next 52 weeks, I will share one option a week....one good option that I glean from either Bach's book or from other tried, tested and true experts. It will be a chance for us to either adopt, change or remove an expensive and wasteful practice from our life and a chance to slowly integrate cost-saving measures that make us more responsible for the rest of our lives.
That first option will start tomorrow on Earth Day.
The rest of the time, I will continue to offer insights and opinions on all matters affecting responsible living: from green initiatives, sad human rights situations, addictions and tools and examples of responsible living in the world today.
And if you have a tip, insight or suggestion, share it...we could all use a little humility by learning to listen.
Friday, April 11, 2008
Power to the People: Viral Campaigns and the Beijing Olympics
Who says the people don't have power?
A marketing firm released a press release today 'warning' Olympic sponsors about the potentially high cost of sponsoring the Beijing Olympics due to the proliference, "impact and dominance of consumer driven, viral campaigns and their ability to affect global consumer behaviours."
Tony Chapman, Founder and CEO of Capital C, one of Canada's leading marketing firms, cautioned Canadian marketers to carefully consider the dangers in fulfilling their Beijing Olympic marketing programs due to the dissatisfaction of activist groups and disheartened individuals -- (all with access to the democratic medium of the internet, I might add).
Chapman states that "the Tibet controversy currently interrupting the torch journey is inspiring a reaction of global proportions. It is becoming deafening as it is digitally enabled and swirls around the world, collecting images, commentary, evidence and an ever growing community of supporters. Conversations which started with Tibet and Darfur will cross over to China's environmental record, its treatment of workers, its foreign policy and every other cause imaginable, ultimately becoming an unstoppable force impenetrable by spin doctors, brand managers, or even the most elaborate marketing campaigns."
Chapman, in his marketing wisdom, goes on to say that the reaction to China and the "viral phenomenon" surrounding demonstrate to global brands that the rules have shifted from mass media (where they were in charge), to social media (where the consumer is in charge). "This is an environment where consumer behaviour will not be based on immediate needs, but upon moral and ethical criteria. Consumers are now demanding more than great taste; they are demanding corporate integrity. Today, how a corporation behaves towards its employees, community and planet, and with whom they associate are the new benchmarks for decision making."
Buyer be warned.
Corporate heads take heed.
As Margaret Mead so cleverly stated:
Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.
A marketing firm released a press release today 'warning' Olympic sponsors about the potentially high cost of sponsoring the Beijing Olympics due to the proliference, "impact and dominance of consumer driven, viral campaigns and their ability to affect global consumer behaviours."
Tony Chapman, Founder and CEO of Capital C, one of Canada's leading marketing firms, cautioned Canadian marketers to carefully consider the dangers in fulfilling their Beijing Olympic marketing programs due to the dissatisfaction of activist groups and disheartened individuals -- (all with access to the democratic medium of the internet, I might add).
Chapman states that "the Tibet controversy currently interrupting the torch journey is inspiring a reaction of global proportions. It is becoming deafening as it is digitally enabled and swirls around the world, collecting images, commentary, evidence and an ever growing community of supporters. Conversations which started with Tibet and Darfur will cross over to China's environmental record, its treatment of workers, its foreign policy and every other cause imaginable, ultimately becoming an unstoppable force impenetrable by spin doctors, brand managers, or even the most elaborate marketing campaigns."
Chapman, in his marketing wisdom, goes on to say that the reaction to China and the "viral phenomenon" surrounding demonstrate to global brands that the rules have shifted from mass media (where they were in charge), to social media (where the consumer is in charge). "This is an environment where consumer behaviour will not be based on immediate needs, but upon moral and ethical criteria. Consumers are now demanding more than great taste; they are demanding corporate integrity. Today, how a corporation behaves towards its employees, community and planet, and with whom they associate are the new benchmarks for decision making."
Buyer be warned.
Corporate heads take heed.
As Margaret Mead so cleverly stated:
Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.
Thursday, April 10, 2008
CARBON BOMB! More Clean Air Please (and please stop stomping on my forest)
Who needs fresh air?
Based on neo-liberal philosophy, even air is a commodity. All this fear-mongering about air pollution and global warming simply means that somebody is going to make money off of the problem somehow...
Unfortunately, the money making is usually what causes the dilemma in the first place...and while I am sure there is money to be made in the creation of atmospheric bubbles (personalized, or fun for the whole town), I somehow don't see that as justification for screwing up our air supply, now.
What am I getting at?
An expert panel, commissioned by Greenpeace, launched their findings in a report today regarding the logging industry in the Boreal forest (this is old growth folks, and plenty of it in our own backyard).
The panel stated that:
Logging in Canada's Boreal Forest is exacerbating global warming by releasing greenhouse gases and reducing carbon storage. It also makes the forest more susceptible to global warming impacts like wildfires and insect outbreaks, which in turn release more greenhouse gases.
Now, here's the kicker:
if this vicious circle is left unchecked, it could culminate in a massive and sudden release of greenhouse gases referred to as "the carbon bomb."
At present Canada's Boreal Forest stores 186 billion tonnes of carbon -- this is equivalent to 27 times the world's annual fossil fuel emissions.
The report concludes that intact areas of the Boreal Forest should be made
off-limits to logging and other industrial activity-particularly in its
biologically rich southern regions- to curb this dangerous cycle.
Elizabeth Nelson, a researcher at the University of Toronto and co-author
of the report, cautions that logging continues to cause greenhouse gas
emissions long after the trees are gone. "Over two-thirds of the carbon stored
in the Boreal Forest is found in its soils. When the forest cover is removed,
the soil decays, releasing additional carbon dioxide into the atmosphere over
the following months, years, and even decades," she said.
To make matters worse, intact areas of the Boreal Forest resist and recover from fires, insect outbreaks, and other impacts better than fragmented areas. These areas also give trees, plants, and wildlife the best chances of migrating, adapting, and
surviving in a changing climate.
Other key findings from the expert-reviewed report:
What can you do?
Write to your work's paper provider -- demand paper harvested from non-old-growth resources (Cascades, a Quebec-based manufacturer is good for this, although Domtar and Grand & Toy also offer propriety recycled products that do not use old-growth).
Reduce what you print (or use old print-outs as scrap).
Write to your MP, demand that legislation be passed to protect our forests (and lungs and future!).
Log on and sign the Greenpeace petition (also look out for local petitions...tables set up in eco-friendly stores with organizations working very hard to protect the Boreal).
Write the companies personally. Tell them you refuse to accept the ramifications of their profits and list ways you will avoid their products.
Start small. Think Big. Take action.
Based on neo-liberal philosophy, even air is a commodity. All this fear-mongering about air pollution and global warming simply means that somebody is going to make money off of the problem somehow...
Unfortunately, the money making is usually what causes the dilemma in the first place...and while I am sure there is money to be made in the creation of atmospheric bubbles (personalized, or fun for the whole town), I somehow don't see that as justification for screwing up our air supply, now.
What am I getting at?
An expert panel, commissioned by Greenpeace, launched their findings in a report today regarding the logging industry in the Boreal forest (this is old growth folks, and plenty of it in our own backyard).
The panel stated that:
Logging in Canada's Boreal Forest is exacerbating global warming by releasing greenhouse gases and reducing carbon storage. It also makes the forest more susceptible to global warming impacts like wildfires and insect outbreaks, which in turn release more greenhouse gases.
Now, here's the kicker:
if this vicious circle is left unchecked, it could culminate in a massive and sudden release of greenhouse gases referred to as "the carbon bomb."
At present Canada's Boreal Forest stores 186 billion tonnes of carbon -- this is equivalent to 27 times the world's annual fossil fuel emissions.
The report concludes that intact areas of the Boreal Forest should be made
off-limits to logging and other industrial activity-particularly in its
biologically rich southern regions- to curb this dangerous cycle.
Elizabeth Nelson, a researcher at the University of Toronto and co-author
of the report, cautions that logging continues to cause greenhouse gas
emissions long after the trees are gone. "Over two-thirds of the carbon stored
in the Boreal Forest is found in its soils. When the forest cover is removed,
the soil decays, releasing additional carbon dioxide into the atmosphere over
the following months, years, and even decades," she said.
To make matters worse, intact areas of the Boreal Forest resist and recover from fires, insect outbreaks, and other impacts better than fragmented areas. These areas also give trees, plants, and wildlife the best chances of migrating, adapting, and
surviving in a changing climate.
Other key findings from the expert-reviewed report:
- Logging removes roughly 36 million tonnes of aboveground carbon from
Canada's Boreal Forest each year-more carbon than is emitted each year
by all the passenger vehicles in Canada combined. - The area of North American Boreal burned by forest fires doubled
between 1970 and 1990. As forest fires become larger, more frequent,
and more intense, more and more carbon dioxide is being released into
the atmosphere. - Logging accelerates permafrost melt. When permafrost melts carbon
dioxide and methane-a greenhouse gas 21 times more potent than carbon
dioxide-are released into the atmosphere. Intact forest cover may delay
this melt for decades or even centuries.
What can you do?
Write to your work's paper provider -- demand paper harvested from non-old-growth resources (Cascades, a Quebec-based manufacturer is good for this, although Domtar and Grand & Toy also offer propriety recycled products that do not use old-growth).
Reduce what you print (or use old print-outs as scrap).
Write to your MP, demand that legislation be passed to protect our forests (and lungs and future!).
Log on and sign the Greenpeace petition (also look out for local petitions...tables set up in eco-friendly stores with organizations working very hard to protect the Boreal).
Write the companies personally. Tell them you refuse to accept the ramifications of their profits and list ways you will avoid their products.
Start small. Think Big. Take action.
Wednesday, April 09, 2008
Slap on Charity and We are Good to Go!
Charity.
Slap that word in front of something, anything, and suddenly the task, the event, the 'expedition' is acceptable.
As my ma would say: Hogwash.
Take for example the latest gimmick by a boot company (name with held in order NOT to provide free advertisement) that sponsored Paul Hubner (and family!) to "ski both the South and North Pole in ONE season!"
Of course, Mr. Hubner was sponsored by the boot company in an effort to prove their boots are 'polar' worthy.
I presume, then, that the melting of the icecaps at the North Pole has completely escaped both Mr. Hubner and his handlers and the polar-boot company. How else could they justify flying Hubner, his family and the film crew (and all their paraphenalia) to the Poles in an effort to capture the gimmick on film?
In a world filled with technological advancements (such as labs that can mimic even the most extreme of weather conditions) it seems highly irresponsible for Hubner and his sponsors to pursue this ad tactic. Unless of course the charity they plan to donate to is "Build Earth's Bubble and Save the Human Parasite"?
Somehow, though, I don't think youth groups across North America, some of the recipients of the money raised, plan on constructing a breathable membrane dome.
Oh, wait...Hubner's advertorial money will also go to: Polar Bears International -- an organization that attempts to teach people about global warming (one major culprit: human transportation, in particular, air travel) and how this environmental crisis is pushing and pulling the ice shelves in the Arctic and Antarctic, and further increasing the risk of polar bear extinction. Let's hope that money raised for the charity can offset the damage done by the Hubner-Boot Ad entourage.
Slap that word in front of something, anything, and suddenly the task, the event, the 'expedition' is acceptable.
As my ma would say: Hogwash.
Take for example the latest gimmick by a boot company (name with held in order NOT to provide free advertisement) that sponsored Paul Hubner (and family!) to "ski both the South and North Pole in ONE season!"
Of course, Mr. Hubner was sponsored by the boot company in an effort to prove their boots are 'polar' worthy.
I presume, then, that the melting of the icecaps at the North Pole has completely escaped both Mr. Hubner and his handlers and the polar-boot company. How else could they justify flying Hubner, his family and the film crew (and all their paraphenalia) to the Poles in an effort to capture the gimmick on film?
In a world filled with technological advancements (such as labs that can mimic even the most extreme of weather conditions) it seems highly irresponsible for Hubner and his sponsors to pursue this ad tactic. Unless of course the charity they plan to donate to is "Build Earth's Bubble and Save the Human Parasite"?
Somehow, though, I don't think youth groups across North America, some of the recipients of the money raised, plan on constructing a breathable membrane dome.
Oh, wait...Hubner's advertorial money will also go to: Polar Bears International -- an organization that attempts to teach people about global warming (one major culprit: human transportation, in particular, air travel) and how this environmental crisis is pushing and pulling the ice shelves in the Arctic and Antarctic, and further increasing the risk of polar bear extinction. Let's hope that money raised for the charity can offset the damage done by the Hubner-Boot Ad entourage.
Tuesday, April 08, 2008
Mayor Miller's Hand-gun Ban Necessary
If I was to ever go hunting -- and that's a *BIG* if, considering I don't eat meat -- I highly doubt my weapon of choice would be a handgun.
For hunting, handguns are just not practical unless, of course, the game you are hunting is human.
While gun proponents have developed a litany of reasons why handguns should not be banned, I have yet to hear a reasonable, rational reason.
Yes, I empathize with gun collectors -- passionate collecting can and does occr, but I doubt that any of these true collectors are clamouring for one of the mass-produced, relatively new weapons that do little, but cause havoc.
Don't give me "freedom of association" crap. You love to shoot them -- then develop clubs where you can not only shoot the tool, but KEEP the tool. There is NO reason why you should have to take that contraption home. Period. Particularly with the plethora of non-lethal (theoretically) tools available to the general public for self-protection.
So, the recent announcment by Toronto's Mayor, David Miller, certainly met *my* approval.
The campaign's centre-piece is an online petition posted on the City's
website (goto: www.toronto.ca/handgunban).
This allows Canadians, coast to coast to add their name to a call for a Canada-wide handgun ban. (For those so inclined to canvas neighbourhoods and workplaces, a print-friendly version of the petition is also available on the website).
Mayor Miller launched this campaign by saying: "Handguns are designed for one purpose and that is to kill people and have no place in our society. Statistics show that in jurisdictions with gun bans, supply is limited and shootings are less common.
Miller will "personally deliver" the petition to Parliament Hill in June.
Want to read more??
Goto:
Globe and Mail Globe
The Star Star
Canadian Business Canadian Business
National Post (contrarian angle) National Post
For hunting, handguns are just not practical unless, of course, the game you are hunting is human.
While gun proponents have developed a litany of reasons why handguns should not be banned, I have yet to hear a reasonable, rational reason.
Yes, I empathize with gun collectors -- passionate collecting can and does occr, but I doubt that any of these true collectors are clamouring for one of the mass-produced, relatively new weapons that do little, but cause havoc.
Don't give me "freedom of association" crap. You love to shoot them -- then develop clubs where you can not only shoot the tool, but KEEP the tool. There is NO reason why you should have to take that contraption home. Period. Particularly with the plethora of non-lethal (theoretically) tools available to the general public for self-protection.
So, the recent announcment by Toronto's Mayor, David Miller, certainly met *my* approval.
The campaign's centre-piece is an online petition posted on the City's
website (goto: www.toronto.ca/handgunban).
This allows Canadians, coast to coast to add their name to a call for a Canada-wide handgun ban. (For those so inclined to canvas neighbourhoods and workplaces, a print-friendly version of the petition is also available on the website).
Mayor Miller launched this campaign by saying: "Handguns are designed for one purpose and that is to kill people and have no place in our society. Statistics show that in jurisdictions with gun bans, supply is limited and shootings are less common.
Miller will "personally deliver" the petition to Parliament Hill in June.
Want to read more??
Goto:
Globe and Mail Globe
The Star Star
Canadian Business Canadian Business
National Post (contrarian angle) National Post
Saturday, April 05, 2008
Sports Fans Jump on Carbon Credits for Beijing Olympics (even if the torch does stay out)
Despite what you might think about the Beijing Olympics, the fact that one of the world's biggest polluters is hosting the "Green" Olympics has not escaped the attention of many a cynical critic.
Yet, rather than focus on this, I would like to draw your attention to notion that shame really does work to change behaviour.
For about two decades a well-known North American travel company has offered the sports enthusiast the ultimate trip: flight, accomodation, sporting event and extras all under one umbrella. You can well imagine Olympics are a boon for this type of company. This year, however, this company (who shall remain nameless, so I am not accused of promotion or slander) is offering another perk: 40,000 lbs of TerraPass carbon offset credits.
I am not saying this company is worthy of shame (that requires analysis by credentials that I do not hold) -- what I am saying is that this company is responding to theories within behaviourial finances -- go where the market is...and the market is fickle.
At the moment green is in. Everything and anything that can attach their name to green, sustainable or ethical initiatives are doing so in droves. This change in corporate behaviour highlights all the important work environmentalists have done over the last four decades; it also highlights the importance of critical mass.
If we get enough people concerned about a topic (whether it's taxes, air pollution, pesticides on our lawn, or the latest violent flick) and business will try to capitalize on that interest.
I am not saying this a negative aspect of our 'free'-market economy.
What I am saying is that it is a predictable aspect of our economy (and an aspect activists and corporations have coopted for years).
Still, there is a powerful aspect to a groundswell movement -- millions of people supporting just one cause. It's even more amazing when those people are not the average activist, protestor, supporter or believer of socio-economic and environmental issues -- and, let's face it, most sports enthusiasts are not. Yet, a vast majority of these enthusiasts who will brave the wrath of supporting the Chinese Olympics are doing so in a more proactive manner (even if there is an argument that carbon off-setting is a greenwash)...and that means that years of shaming and blaming have come out to provide alternatives to our actions. That's growth...and I'm all over that
Yet, rather than focus on this, I would like to draw your attention to notion that shame really does work to change behaviour.
For about two decades a well-known North American travel company has offered the sports enthusiast the ultimate trip: flight, accomodation, sporting event and extras all under one umbrella. You can well imagine Olympics are a boon for this type of company. This year, however, this company (who shall remain nameless, so I am not accused of promotion or slander) is offering another perk: 40,000 lbs of TerraPass carbon offset credits.
I am not saying this company is worthy of shame (that requires analysis by credentials that I do not hold) -- what I am saying is that this company is responding to theories within behaviourial finances -- go where the market is...and the market is fickle.
At the moment green is in. Everything and anything that can attach their name to green, sustainable or ethical initiatives are doing so in droves. This change in corporate behaviour highlights all the important work environmentalists have done over the last four decades; it also highlights the importance of critical mass.
If we get enough people concerned about a topic (whether it's taxes, air pollution, pesticides on our lawn, or the latest violent flick) and business will try to capitalize on that interest.
I am not saying this a negative aspect of our 'free'-market economy.
What I am saying is that it is a predictable aspect of our economy (and an aspect activists and corporations have coopted for years).
Still, there is a powerful aspect to a groundswell movement -- millions of people supporting just one cause. It's even more amazing when those people are not the average activist, protestor, supporter or believer of socio-economic and environmental issues -- and, let's face it, most sports enthusiasts are not. Yet, a vast majority of these enthusiasts who will brave the wrath of supporting the Chinese Olympics are doing so in a more proactive manner (even if there is an argument that carbon off-setting is a greenwash)...and that means that years of shaming and blaming have come out to provide alternatives to our actions. That's growth...and I'm all over that
Friday, April 04, 2008
Animal Cruelty Punished; Now We Need Human Desperation Addressed
We knew for at least a decade that a strong correlation existed between animal cruelty and violent criminal acts.
Reports, studies, journal pieces and news articles have been written on the topic.
Statistics and numbers have been recorded.
Finally, after a decade of prompting Ontario finally elected a government willing to create stiffer penalties for animal cruelty.
This is not just a moral victory for animal activists, but also for those who lobby for stiffer penalties agains perpetrators of domestic abuse as well as the victims of violence across North America.
To put it bluntly (and factually):
According to the American Veterinarian Association there are three ways that animal abuse and human violence are linked:
1. Abusers use animals to influence or harm people: demonstrate dominance or control, inflict punishment or to retaliate against the abused (or vice versa - punish the person for the acts of the animal), and through silence, isolation and threats.
2. Abused children show a propensity towards becoming animal abusers
(Multiple studies have shown that children who grow up in an environment of animal abuse are more likely to be involved in animal abuse and human violence as they grow up. Young children growing up in an environment of abuse may become desensitized, and come to see violence as the norm. They may also learn that one way to demonstrate you have power or control is to abuse a creature that is weaker than you. Children in households with emotional or physical abuse between partners may vent or "act out" their resulting emotions, often through cruelty to animals.)
3. Animal abuse may predict adult violence
(People who abused pets as children are far more likely to commit murder or other violent crimes as they become adults. In fact, one of the most reliable predictors of adult violence is committing animal abuse as a child.)
With that in mind, Rick Bartolucci, minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services, announcement, to amend the OSPCA act to make it mandatory for veterinarians to report suspected cases of animal abuse (with protection for veterinarians when the report is made in good faith) was widely and openly welcomed by vets across Ontario.
Now, for the disbelievers, I would like to offer the following rather scary facts:
Between October 1997 and May 1998 (seven months) school shootings across America left 12 dead and 44 wounded (in four schools).
Prior to these school shootings:
Youth offenders are not the only ones to display cruelty to animals prior to violent criminal acts. Russell Weston Jr., the man awaiting trial for shooting two Capitol Hill police officers, shot his father's cats before his assault on the Capitol.
And there are many, many more cases like these.
Whether an animal lover or a dispassionate bystander, the correlation between animal violence and disturbed, often brutally violent behaviour is undeniable.
McGuinty's decision to stiffen the penalties for those caught abusing animals is the first step, but more needs be done. That's because animal abuse does not occur in isolation. Often animal abuse takes place in a complex net of disturbed family relations. For example, animal abuse is frequently found in families where there also is child abuse and domestic violence. Children in these disturbed families who witness the abuse of family companion animals are more likely to abuse animals; in addition, children who commit animal cruelty are more likely to engage in criminal behavior as adults.
As such, we, in Ontario, need to applaud McGuinty and his government for finally creating stiffer laws against these offenders...but we also need to press for rehabilitation and help for those that display these behaviours. The reality is that most convicted felons will, eventually, return into society. By identifying candidates -- through their convictions -- we can provide rehabilitation and, hopefully, reintegration.
In the end we want the abuse to stop...and the best way to do that is remove that which disturbs.
Reports, studies, journal pieces and news articles have been written on the topic.
Statistics and numbers have been recorded.
Finally, after a decade of prompting Ontario finally elected a government willing to create stiffer penalties for animal cruelty.
This is not just a moral victory for animal activists, but also for those who lobby for stiffer penalties agains perpetrators of domestic abuse as well as the victims of violence across North America.
To put it bluntly (and factually):
- 61% of surveyed Ontario women who had left their abusive partners stated that their partners had brutalized or killed a pet (results from a 1998 survey conducted by the Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals).
- By contrast, only 16.7% of households with no history of domestic reported threats or actual harm to a pet.
According to the American Veterinarian Association there are three ways that animal abuse and human violence are linked:
1. Abusers use animals to influence or harm people: demonstrate dominance or control, inflict punishment or to retaliate against the abused (or vice versa - punish the person for the acts of the animal), and through silence, isolation and threats.
2. Abused children show a propensity towards becoming animal abusers
(Multiple studies have shown that children who grow up in an environment of animal abuse are more likely to be involved in animal abuse and human violence as they grow up. Young children growing up in an environment of abuse may become desensitized, and come to see violence as the norm. They may also learn that one way to demonstrate you have power or control is to abuse a creature that is weaker than you. Children in households with emotional or physical abuse between partners may vent or "act out" their resulting emotions, often through cruelty to animals.)
3. Animal abuse may predict adult violence
(People who abused pets as children are far more likely to commit murder or other violent crimes as they become adults. In fact, one of the most reliable predictors of adult violence is committing animal abuse as a child.)
With that in mind, Rick Bartolucci, minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services, announcement, to amend the OSPCA act to make it mandatory for veterinarians to report suspected cases of animal abuse (with protection for veterinarians when the report is made in good faith) was widely and openly welcomed by vets across Ontario.
Now, for the disbelievers, I would like to offer the following rather scary facts:
Between October 1997 and May 1998 (seven months) school shootings across America left 12 dead and 44 wounded (in four schools).
Prior to these school shootings:
- Kip Kinkel decapitated cats, dissected live squirrels and blew up cows
- Andrew Golden shot dogs before he turned his guns on his classmates
- Luke Woodham beat and burned his own dog, Sparkle, describing his dog's painful and tortured death as a "thing of true beauty"
- Michael Carneal threw a cat into a bonfire
Youth offenders are not the only ones to display cruelty to animals prior to violent criminal acts. Russell Weston Jr., the man awaiting trial for shooting two Capitol Hill police officers, shot his father's cats before his assault on the Capitol.
And there are many, many more cases like these.
Whether an animal lover or a dispassionate bystander, the correlation between animal violence and disturbed, often brutally violent behaviour is undeniable.
McGuinty's decision to stiffen the penalties for those caught abusing animals is the first step, but more needs be done. That's because animal abuse does not occur in isolation. Often animal abuse takes place in a complex net of disturbed family relations. For example, animal abuse is frequently found in families where there also is child abuse and domestic violence. Children in these disturbed families who witness the abuse of family companion animals are more likely to abuse animals; in addition, children who commit animal cruelty are more likely to engage in criminal behavior as adults.
As such, we, in Ontario, need to applaud McGuinty and his government for finally creating stiffer laws against these offenders...but we also need to press for rehabilitation and help for those that display these behaviours. The reality is that most convicted felons will, eventually, return into society. By identifying candidates -- through their convictions -- we can provide rehabilitation and, hopefully, reintegration.
In the end we want the abuse to stop...and the best way to do that is remove that which disturbs.
Thursday, April 03, 2008
Junkie or Pundit -- U.S. Candidates (in their own words) on Enviro Issues
Political pundit or power junkie?
These are some of the questions the League of Conservation Voters attempt to answer through the lens of sustainability/environmentalism.
By examining each of the three leading candidates (Clinton, McCain and Obama) the League helps voters help themselves and the planet.
Think of Justice League...only without the shields and capes.
For more information go to:
Senator Clinton's rating: CLINTON on the ENVIRO
Senator McCain's rating: McCAIN on the ENVIRO
Senator Obama's rating: OBAMA on the ENVIRO
These are some of the questions the League of Conservation Voters attempt to answer through the lens of sustainability/environmentalism.
By examining each of the three leading candidates (Clinton, McCain and Obama) the League helps voters help themselves and the planet.
Think of Justice League...only without the shields and capes.
For more information go to:
Senator Clinton's rating: CLINTON on the ENVIRO
Senator McCain's rating: McCAIN on the ENVIRO
Senator Obama's rating: OBAMA on the ENVIRO
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
