conservation Archives

Ecocabs in Toronto

Redwing Institute Discovery Walk

Bruce Peninsula Park

Sustainability January 8, 2018

What is the deal with eco-tourism?

It’s a term being thrown around a lot within the tourism industry — eco-tourism. But, what exactly does that mean?

In the simplest terms, eco-tourism is the idea that your travel will not impact the environment. Instead, it will actually contributes to the local community.

When people travel, they tend to bring a lot of their baggage with them. And no, I’m not talking about emotional baggage or your carry-on.

Tourists tend to focus on only one thing. Sightseeing. They want to hit the most popular destinations, take perfectly filtered images for their Instagram account at the nicest restaurants, or visit franchise stores to do some shopping. These tourists take taxis, trains, and planes, and sometimes even use products with dangerous chemicals that could contaminate oceans. Don’t even get me started on the number of plastic straws used in beverages.

Most tourists create a carbon footprint that has the potential to damage a community, especially in remote locations or islands that depend on their natural beauty to attract revenue. While there isn’t much that can be done about completely eliminating this footprint, there is a way to reduce it. The answer is, obviously, eco-tourism.

According to the International Ecotourism Society, for an activity to be a part of “eco-tourism”, it has to have an educational aspect. It should promote conservation and community, while trying to adopt sustainable practices. Guides and participants must recognize the rights and spiritual beliefs of the Indigenous People There should also be some financial benefit towards these practices.

The activities must also operate within low-impact facilities.

The World Conservation Union (IUCN) describes eco-tourism as “environmentally responsible travel to natural areas, in order to enjoy and appreciate nature (and accompanying cultural features, both past and present) that promote conservation, have a low visitor impact and provide for beneficially active socio-economic involvement of local peoples.”

The definitions are still open to interpretation. Some agencies choose to describe any nature-related activity or tour as eco-tourism. For example, whale watching in Hawaii is described as an eco-tourist activity. However, the cruise boat itself could be impacting the ecosystem below the surface of the water. A more ecologically-friendly activity would be to kayak or canoe the waters with a guide who talks about the wildlife or the conservation techniques in place to protect the natural beauty of an area.

Tourists can take tours of plantations or farms; but they can also participate for a day, learning hands on how food grows and gets to their plate. Visit an indigenous settlement and listen to stories from the community. If you go on a nature walk, stick to trails — don’t wander into a natural environment without a guide. Remember, the purpose of eco-tourism is to learn and give back to the community.

Here are three eco-tourism activities you can do in Ontario:

Redwing Institute Culture and Nature Discovery Walk: Take this 3-hour journey and learn about the Indigenous people of Humber Valley. Participants will explore the river valley, participate in a traditional ceremony, sample food and music, and explore history through oral storytelling. Part of the fees go towards a skill-development program for women from the Indigenous community living in Toronto.
Visit a Biosphere Reserve: Wilderness Eco-Adventures offers half and full day guided excursions of the Bruce Peninsula Biosphere Reserve. Climb cliffs, explore caves, and see rare wildlife. They also offer more intensive workshops where you can learn a new skill like geology or bushcraft. Looking for a challenge? Spend three nights under the stars this winter. Proceeds support the Biosphere Association’s environmental projects.
EcoCab through Toronto: Instead of taking a bus or renting a car, see downtown Toronto up close with a pedal-powered bicycle. Don’t worry about the physical activity as each tour guide will also be your navigator and official pedal-er). There are four routes to choose from.

Have you participated in eco-tourism? Let us know what your experience was like in the comments below!

Sustainability July 30, 2016

Ontario needs to make conservation a priority

Have you ever been hiking on Manitoulin Island or in the Niagara Escarpment and paused for a moment to appreciate the ethereal beauty of the natural land?

Conservation is the only way to ensure that certain areas remain protected in Ontario. The problem is that it is no easy feat to keep land from the greedy hands of major developers, and every single day more of these natural habitats disappears. Escarpment Biosphere Conservancy is a land trust that is dedicated to ensuring natural landmarks are conserved in the province. Unfortunately, the province of Ontario has removed their funding and this leaves the charity in a difficult position to continue protecting natural regions.

As a land trust, Escarpment Biosphere Conservancy accepts donations of land for conservation and also helps property owners to protect their own land from buyers. The conservancy is spearheaded by Robert Barnett, a passionate conservation advocate and architect by trade. The charity has 151 nature reserves making up 47 km altogether in the province. Biosphere focuses operations in the escarpment, but has several reserves across the province and is the second largest conservation charity in Ontario.

Thomson Reserve near Wiarton, Ont. Photo provided by Bob Barnett, Escarpment Biosphere Conservancy.

However, the charity has been facing roadblocks since their funding was removed in 2012. In that same year, the provincial government released a new plan called biodiversity: it’s in our nature to compliment Canada’s decision to sign a mandate towards conserving 17 per cent of Ontario land by 2020. The plan indicated that by 2020, “17 per cent of terrestrial and aquatic systems are conserved through well-connected networks of protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures”. Four years later, conservation areas stand at 4.4 per cent.

“The minister announced this plan in 2012 and now of course nothing is happening. They aren’t increasing the land protected area at all,” Barnett says. “The premier has given the minister a mandate to protect our biodiversity and once again, nothing is being done. The environmental commissioner at the time, Diane Sax, recommended that they put funding into protected areas. This means the environmental commissioner, the premier, and the biodiversity initiative are being ignored.”

More than that, the province removed the charity’s funding the same year they introduced the new plan to increase biodiversity conservation. Previously, Biosphere received $30,000 to $40,000 in provincial funding to support operations at the charity. Now, Barnett can only rely on cash donations and limited federal funding for the projects.

“We spend $100,000 a year to protect the land, for legal fees and getting inventories done. It costs $5000 to receive a land donation because of appraisals and paperwork,” Barnett says. “That is a lot of money for a charity and we just don’t have it.”

Barnett believes that the funding cuts are in part due to the budget cuts the Ontario ministry of natural resources has experienced in the last five years. That being said, natural areas bring $84 billion to the economy and the conservation funding only costs $135,000. The Ontario government could easily fund such a low budget to complete such an important task.

Cape Hurd where one of the cottages to rent is located. Photo provided by Bob Barnett, Escarpment Biosphere conservancy.

One MPP is trying to make a difference for property owners interested in conservation. Eglinton-Lawrence MPP Mike Colle has introduced a private member’s bill to lower the property tax on private properties that place covenants protecting the land on their property. If a person owns a piece of land, they have the option to contact a land trust such as Biosphere to create a list of restrictions — known as covenants — to prevent future land owners from ever building a gravel pit on the land for example. In exchange for placing covenants on the land, homeowners receive a $100,000 tax receipt from Biosphere as a part of the land trust.

Placing covenants on the land lowers the property value, but the province continues to charge them the same property tax anyways. Colle has presented a bill to lower the property tax for conservation covenants to zero. The bill has had its first reading in 2012 and has since been stalled. It is yet another example of the province not putting conservation of the land as a priority.

It is apparent that the province needs to pull up its britches and take conservation seriously. The fact that only four per cent of land in Ontario is protected when there is a mandate in place to have 17 per cent is unacceptable. The funding for Biosphere and other conservation charities needs to be reinstated and hopefully Colle’s bill will pass second reading and become law. Conservation doesn’t appear to be a priority — let’s make it one!

News March 21, 2016

Seaworld ends captive breeding, but is it enough?

A moment of rare celebration has occurred in the marine animal world. Seaworld announced on March 17 they are officially retiring the captive orca breeding program and theatrical shows involving killer whales.

Seaworld currently has 29 orcas in captivity, with six killer whales on loan. The remaining orcas will stay under the care of Seaworld and are to be the last of their kind in the entertainment facility. Seaworld holds the most marine animals in confinement in the world, and this is welcome news for cetacean activists who have been fighting against orca captivity for years.

The decision to stop theatrical shows involving orcas and end the captive breeding program is arguably the result of social pressures from the 2013 film, Blackfish. This documentary investigated the inhumane conditions of the orcas at Seaworld and the death of orca trainer by killer whale, Tilikum in 2010.

Though the end of the captive whale program is positive, key concerns remain. Seaworld’s website says, “These majestic orcas will not be released in the ocean or confined to sea cages….our existing show pools and viewing areas will be redesigned into a more naturalistic setting and we will continue to present the whales at scheduled times before a guest audience”.

I wonder what they were trying to insinuate with the carefully chosen language of “sea cages”. Sea pen sanctuaries are closed off spaces in bays or coves that could serve as conservation areas for previously captive whales. In comparison to cages on land, living in the ocean in a conservation area would be a welcome option. Seaworld’s immediate dismissal on the part of sea pens and research into them for their remaining orcas is a sore point.

“[The whales] could not survive in oceans to compete for food, be exposed to unfamiliar diseases or have to deal with environmental concerns,” Seaworld says. “Instead they will live long and healthy lives under love and care of our dedicated veterinary and other trained specialists.”

Captive whales have a much lower life expectancy than whales in the ocean. According to a 2011 study by scientist, Naomi Rose, the natural life span of female whales is 80-90 years and male whales is 60-70 years. In captivity, only two female whales have passed 40 and no male whales have lived past 35.

The study also notes the most common causes of death for captive whales are pneumonia, septicemia and other infections. In recent news, Tilikum of Blackfish, is reported to be ailing with an incurable bacterial infection. The study also says, “contributing factors to infection-caused mortality in captive orcas may be immunosuppression. Pathogens or injuries that the immune systems of wild orcas would successfully combat or manage may be fatal to captive orcas, due to chronic stress, psychological depression, and even boredom.”

On March 28 2015, Ontario banned the captivity and sale of orcas, the first and only province in Canada to do so. Unfortunately, Kiska, the lone captive whale in Canada was exempt from this law similarly to Seaworld’s captive orcas because she had been purchased by Marineland beforehand.

I can personally attest to Kiska’s boredom and agitation upon seeing her at the park. I visited to try and take pictures of the state of marine life in this abomination of an entertainment attraction when I was covering a protest for Marineland Animal Defense (M.A.D) for an animal rights publication.

I watched Kiska swim on the outer reaches of her tank, continually charging around and around her cage without pause. The orca displayed signs of telltale boredom often seen in confined animals, and upon asking the caretakers of the facility why she was alone, they replied, “because she wants to be”. The lack of evidence they were able to provide me according to that assertion was astounding to say the least.

The physical and psychological health concerns that pertain to confined orcas forces me to question whether ending the captive breeding program at Seaworld is enough. The exploration of sea pens needs to be considered as a solution for captive killer whales around the world, not to mention other marine life in captivity.

Seaworld’s announcement is only a partial victory for the confined killer whales. They will still remain in concrete tanks and will still participate in shows for the public. It forces me to ask: is this really a victory for the whales still currently in captivity worldwide?

It appears that future whales have been saved from the same life in imprisonment as Kiska and Tillikum. But, will the currently captive whales ever be able to swim in the ocean themselves, or will they instead suffer their fate in a concrete tank alone and forgotten?