|
WHAT IS BIODIVERSITY:
We define an area's level
of biodiversity as the variety, quantity, and quality of its native plants
and animals.
We do not boil biodiversity down to a single number indicating the total number
of different kinds of species that exist in an area. That would be
incomplete (eg: Are the remaining species native
or alien? Are they wild or captive? Are there only a few individuals left
of each species or thousands? Are their cells full of mercury and PCB
pollution from humans? Did they evolve through natural selection or captive
breeding programs managed by humans? Are they now
dependent on human assistance in order to survive under reduced/degraded
habitat? etc)
In other words, our definition of an area's biodiversity level is based on
how similar an area's composition of plant and animal species (variety,
quantity, quality) is to what it would be without human interference.
While humans are a part of nature, they are the only species that can
radically change an area's composition of plant and animal species. All
other species are incapable of rapidly reducing biodiversity unless humans
interfere by introducing them as an alien species. For example, when humans
introduced Hawaiian Cane Toads to Australia as a method of
agricultural pest control, Australian biodiversity suffered a major
decline. Likewise, man’s
introduction of Carp to Canada significantly lowered
biodiversity. Cane Toads and Carp
are not at fault. Humans are to
blame for introducing them to places where they do not belong. Not surprisingly, human population growth
accelerates the rate of alien species introductions.
Changes to climate could also reduce biodiversity. About 12,000 years ago
Canada was more than 95% covered in ice year round. However, natural
climatic changes such as ice ages happen slowly, giving species time to
migrate and/or adapt. Furthermore, natural climatic changes are out of our
control just like meteor impacts or volcanic eruptions. Biodiversity loss
due to overpopulation of humans (titled "The 6th Mass
Extinction") is what we are responsible for starting, and we are
therefore responsible for stopping.
"Climate Change" from human greenhouse gas emissions is often
regarded by the media as the worst threat to biodiversity, so why don't we
focus on "Climate Change"?
1) "Climate Change" caused by excessive anthropogenic greenhouse
gas emissions is only a symptom of human overpopulation.
2) Habitat loss from building new subdivisions, extracting timber, oil/gas,
minerals, etc is also a symptom of human overpopulation.
We have seen more species go extinct due to "2" than due to
"1". In any case, since "1" and "2" are
caused and made worse by overpopulation, it is imperative that we advocate
reducing human population in order to prevent biodiversity loss due to
"1" and "2".
Components of Biodiversity
Variety: The introduction of alien species by humans does not count as
an increase in biodiversity even if it raises the total number of species
in an area.
Quantity: If an area still has the same number of different kinds of
native species, but the number of individuals in one or more of these
species has declined due to human activity, then biodiversity has declined.
Quality: If the variety of species and the quantity of each species has
not declined, but the species has been contaminated by anthropogenic
pollutants, then biodiversity has declined. If an area still has all of its native species in their natural cycling
proportions, but if the genetic fitness of one or more species have been
weakened by human interference such as artificial selection of fish or
trees for their short-term economic value, then biodiversity has declined.
If an outside group of a species is "reintroduced" by humans to
an area, biodiversity has declined. (eg:
After Yellowstone's gray wolves became
extinct, humans introduced gray wolves from Northwest Territories to Yellowstone. These wolves are not of
equal quality for that ecosystem since they did not evolve in the
Yellowstone area and would have never interbred with Yellowstone's original
wolves)
The ecological stability and integrity of specific areas is maximized by
maintaining their natural level of biodiversity.
WHAT ARE BIODIVERSITY
SERVICES:
Biodiversity services are required for
the long-term survival of humans on earth.
Biodiversity services include, but are
not limited to the following:
-provide pristine drinking water for
humans without complicated technological or energy inputs.
-protect humans from viruses by diluting
the pool of host targets.
-ensures a resilient food supply for
humans through diversification of food sources.
-provides medicine.
-provides specialized building and
clothing materials whose synthetic replacements are impossible in a post
fossil fuel world.
In an area where biodiversity services
have been broken such as Montreal or Fort McMurray; human life is not possible without
fossil fuels and external inputs from places where biodiversity still
offers its services.
MISSION:
To protect what is left of earth's
biodiversity in a way never attempted by any other environmental
organization:
To educate the public that national
population policies to reduce human populations to sustainable levels are
needed in order to preserve biodiversity.
To educate the public that immigration is
the primary source of population growth in countries such as Canada, Australia, USA, Britain, etc and therefore immigration is most
responsible for loss of biodiversity in these countries.
To educate the public that:
Environmental
Impact = Population X Consumption Per Capita
STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLES:
Unlike the vast majority of other
environmental organizations, Biodiversity First will speak the truth even
when it is unpopular or politically incorrect to do so.
We do not dispute that there are good
reasons, other than protecting biodiversity, for opposing mass immigration
and open borders policies. But these are not as compelling or as critically
important as the survival of species. Before economic or cultural concerns,
biodiversity must come first.
Population growth by immigration is being
promoted by government, media, and business as a way to increase cultural
diversity and corporate profits at the same time, but it has come at the
expense of Canada's biological diversity. For example, in areas hit hardest by
immigration such as the Greater Toronto Area, very little remains of the
variety, quantity and quality of birds, fish, reptiles and amphibians
native to that region.
To determine a safe, long-term carrying
capacity for Canada, the preservation of biodiversity
services must be accorded first priority.
Biodiversity services must not be replaced with engineered
energy-intensive technological replacements. (eg:
wild fisheries must not be replaced with fish hatcheries and fish farms)
Carrying capacity is not optimum
capacity. If and when the maximum number of people who can inhabit Canada is determined, our goal should be
discover what is the desirable, or optimum, number.
Numbers Matter. It is not where Canadians are situated
that is decisive, but how many there are. There will never be a way of
planning and/or managing growth that prevents it from degrading the
environment. The number of Canadians
dictates the scale of our environmental impact, not where or how densely we
live.
WHO ARE WE:
We are a Canadian organization with
members throughout the world who understand the impossibility of preserving
biodiversity without stopping and reversing human population growth.
WE RECOGNIZE THAT:
-biodiversity not only makes life
interesting for humans on earth; it is the best metric for our quality of
life.
-biodiversity is essential to our
survival, especially in a post fossil fuel society.
-without biodiversity services human life
terminates.
-areas that still possess a high degree
of their original biodiversity have become increasingly rare in spite of
the fact that these areas are more healthy, resilient, and valuable.
-earth and its resources are finite and
therefore no type of population or economy on earth can grow indefinitely.
-no other planet can or will ever be able
to sustain humans.
-earth's natural capital is being
depleted faster than it can be replenished due to the presence of too many
people.
-even if every person on earth each only
took the minimum amount of resources to survive, earth's natural capital
would still be getting depleted faster than it can be replenished.
-biodiversity decline will never be
stopped unless the human population is reduced to a sane, sustainable
number.
-the conventional conservation method of
increasing "protected" areas alongside continued population
growth, has not and will never stop biodiversity loss.
-services that biodiversity provides (eg: water purification in drinkable streams and lakes
surrounded by wild forests) are free and manmade replacement systems cost
massive energy and resources (eg: urban water
treatment including chlorination of spoiled water sources).
-when human population increases,
biodiversity invariably decreases.
-as biodiversity decreases, biodiversity
services are revoked.
-"smart growth" or densified urban population growth is a still a dumb
option. There is no sanctuary from
population growth of any kind. Experience shows us that even the strictest
land use policies cannot defend nature reserves, parks, wetlands,
greenbelts or farmland from human encroachment. Dense urban populations
sequestered from the hinterland still damage the hinterland's biodiversity
because they consume natural resources and generate wastes. A growing Canada can never be ecologically benign.
-the litmus test for any immigration
policy must be, NOT how many people, skilled or otherwise, does the economy
"need"; but how many can the environment sustain.
-any activity that has the potential to
reduce biodiversity, must have limits imposed. This includes not only fishing and
hunting, but also child-bearing.
-a woman cannot have the absolute right
to produce as many children as she wants without taking away the absolute
right of others to have enough food, water or breathable air to survive. Such is the reality of an earth that is
finite.
IN CANADA:
-immigration is the chief source of
population growth and therefore biodiversity loss in Canada.
-overpopulation is both a local and a global
problem and since there is no world government, Canada should set a good example for other
countries by reducing its population to a sustainable level.
-as immigrants enter Canada from other countries, they increase
their ecological footprint, fertility rate, and life expectancy above
global averages to the detriment of the local and global environment.
-immigration in general enables unspoiled
areas to be rapidly taken over, thereby maximizing global overpopulation as
population moves from areas of high concentration to areas of low
concentration.
-immigration is the friend of big
business (eg: Royal Bank of Canada lobbies our government for a higher
immigration intake) who want to drive down standards and wages for Canadian
workers and grow their customer base, at the expense of biodiversity.
CANADA SHOULD:
-work for the promotion of biodiversity
globally by opposing all foreign aid that is not made conditional on
fertility rate reductions.
-support the efforts of those in
developed countries like Australia, USA and UK that are fighting government
policies of mass immigration. These policies are accelerating the decline
of biodiversity via population growth in the same manner as Canada.
-reduce our own population to a
sustainable level
TO OUR CRITICS:
We will reject our opponents
characterization of us as an insular, reactionary, xenophobic, racist or
misanthropic organization with a fortress mentality. Our membership indicates that we have an
international scope. We believe in
international cooperation, and international exchange of ideas. But
internationalism is not globalism. It is not
being an unwitting handmaiden to the multinational goal of a borderless
world where cheap migrant labour can be brought
across countries without impediment to displace organized labour, depress their wages, destroy the middle class
and by the way, the environment in the bargain.
Those who say that overpopulation is a
GLOBAL problem needing a GLOBAL government forget that there is no
"Global" government presently. Population policy occurs at the
national level. We also believe international goodwill is not contingent on
throwing our borders wide open. We don’t have to leave the front door of
our house wide open every day to get our neighbours
to like us. Japan is liked and respected in the
international community, with exception of their whaling practices, and
they have a zero immigration policy. We think our primary obligation is to
preserve Canada's natural capital and hope other
countries follow our responsible leadership.
GOALS:
1) Through pressure exerted by an educated
public; to see more recognition in the media that all environmental
problems are caused and made worse by overpopulation.
2) To see broad public support for a
population policy in Canada based on lowering our population to an
optimum level.
3) To see a change in our culture where it
is considered socially and environmentally outrageous for couples to have 3
or more children.
4) To see widespread recognition that immigration
is an environmental issue.
5) To foster public awareness that present
populations are inflated due to exploitation of fossil fuel resources and
that if we do not lower them in time, the majority will die prematurely of
starvation.
6) To see opinion polls revealing the
public's desire for reduced immigration for a population reduction so that
biodiversity can be preserved
CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL
ORGANIZATIONS (HALL OF SHAME):
None of the following environmental
organizations advocate reducing the human
population to a sustainable level, let alone a method for doing so. Not surprisingly therefore none will identify immigration-driven population growth
as the major factor in the environmental degradation of Canada. As a result, they can only hope to slow
down the loss of biodiversity rather than prevent it. Many of these organizations pay their
directors 6-figure salaries as overall environmental integrity declines due
to human population increases. All
refuse to reveal if large corporate donations underwrite any of these
salaries as is the case with Sierra Club USA.
The Sierra Club Canada
The Nature Conservancy of Canada
Canadian Wildlife Federation
Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society
World Wildlife Fund Canada
Nature Canada
Ontario Nature
The David Suzuki Foundation
Due to limited space, we could not list
all environmental organizations who conveniently
choose to ignore population growth caused by immigration as a factor in
environmental degradation.
|
