Behind-the-scenes of The Missive #13

Anticipating disaster, voting for nature protection (or not) and do conservatives really think climate change is not a factor in wildfires?

My Scottish/Irish ancestors arrived on the east coast of so-called “Canada” in the late 1700’s or early 1800’s and were part of several waves of genocidal colonization of the Indigenous people who were already here. We arrived uninvited on the traditional unceded territory of the Wəlastəkewiyik (Maliseet) whose ancestors along with the Mi’Kmaq / Mi’kmaw and Passamaquoddy / Peskotomuhkati Tribes / Nations signed Peace and Friendship Treaties with the British Crown in the 1700s. I like to explain my family’s history and keep this foremost in my mind (and my writing) at all times. I know I have benefited as a result of colonization, and I find the history deeply troubling. It is what motivates me to understand the true history and advocate for real reconciliation. As a child in the 1970’s, I moved west with my family and am grateful to be writing this newsletter now in Moh’kinsstis, and the traditional Treaty 7 territory of the Blackfoot confederacy: Siksika, Kainai, Piikani, as well as the Îyâxe Nakoda and Tsuut’ina nations. This territory is also home to the Métis Nation of Alberta, Region 3 within the historical Northwest Métis homeland. I recognize that the land I now work and live on was stolen from these nations (truth) and I support giving the land back as an act of reconciliation. Lands inhabited by Indigenous Peoples contain 80% of the world’s remaining biodiversity. Indigenous Peoples’ traditional knowledge and knowledge systems are key to designing a sustainable future for all.

Thoughts following my new article in The Energy Mix:

Every year, probably since 2016, I look back and feel like the previous year was the worst one yet. This year, things feel different. And not in a good way.

That’s because although 2024 was stunningly bad in the political realm, it’s probably not as bad as the year lurking ahead of us.

Since I already have a finely-tuned, running-in-the-background-constantly fight or flight reflex, this anticipation of disaster is like a familiar state of mind for me.

That’s not to suggest it’s a good thing to be perpetually on-edge, downing coffee like a mad person, and ready to barricade my doors against the coming apocalypse in an instant.

No, it’s terribly destructive and now that I’m able to pour my energy into writing about things that worry me, I’m feeling better prepared to face the days ahead.

Yet, as I was researching and writing this story for The Energy Mix, I had a strong sense of foreboding about the coming federal election.

Conservative-leaning voters have traditionally been comfortable and largely supportive of nature conservation efforts, but that seems to be changing, if this poll is any indication.

Most concerning is the fact that most conservatives who took part in this survey said that forest protection and greenhouse gas emission reduction plans make no difference to them at the ballot box.

With the upcoming federal election, and predictions of a Conservative party win, this leaves me with grave concerns about climate change action in the coming four years.

I interviewed a couple of people who’ve been working in nature protection for decades about their thoughts and strategies for the immediate future and we’ll be running a second story in January.

I recommend reading the full article for some of the details and check out the full polling results on the Nature Canada website. Here’s an excerpt (below) and a link to the Dec. 17 story, which is the first part of a two-part piece.

And if you have the ability to become a paid subscriber to The Missive, my personal newsletter, I’m offering a special “disaster discount” for annual subscriptions.

There are also further insights from the Nature Canada research (in case you don’t want to read through the 48 page document!) below for paid subscribers.

Canadians Back Stronger Forest Protections as Wealthy Nations Face Scrutiny

A call for international alignment on nature protection has criticized Canada and other wealthy countries for “double standards” in managing their forests, just as a new poll reveals most Canadians support stronger safeguards for nature at home.

But that support may not be enough to sway their voting decisions.

Amid a global push to reverse forest loss and degradation by 2030, wealthy and developed countries have focused heavily on tropical deforestation while downplaying logging impacts in their own forests, writes Sikeade Egbuwalo, biodiversity lead at Nigeria’s federal environment ministry, in an op-ed for Climate Home News.

Egbuwalo calls it a “deeply rooted double standard,” adding that “primary and old-growth forests are being clearcut at alarming rates in the Global North, where forestry is driving some of the highest rates of tree cover loss in the world.”

African nations have called for the development of a global forest accountability and equity framework to standardize reporting, monitoring, and definitions of forest degradation across tropical, temperate, and boreal forests. “We cannot have a system that holds the wealthiest countries to a different standard,” Egbuwalo writes.

New polling data suggests most Canadians agree that stronger safeguards are needed at home—but opinions diverge when it comes to how platform and policy influence voting choices.

Read the full article for FREE on The Energy Mix website.