[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Chad-Cameroon Pipeline Project
On 28 Mar 2001, at 0:58, -RJ- wrote:
> Headline reads: "Pipeline to Eliminate Ecosystems and Drive Rare Fish
> Species Into Extinction!"
> (Insert a color photo of a beautiful killifish.)
>
> Petro-company spin: "At least we let hobbyists take one last look before we
> killed off all of the fish."
If they have a good team of spindoctors that headline would read
something to the effect that the fish was never there...
> The preferred petro-headline:
> "Pipeline to Benefit Local Economy and Consumers Worldwide." (No mention of
> the ecology.)
> (Insert photo of happy natives)
Our goal should be to make happy natives without the use of an oil
company. I recall stories of Bitter and Erbel paying the natives to
catch the killies for them or for the killies they caught when they
went collecting. As soon as something has a value attached
people respect it more. In reagard to the bird watching cattle
grower that is a good idea to implement in tropical africa. Any
ecotourism idea is a good one. My apologies before hand but
tourists will pay the equivalent of a local fortune for goods and
trinkets that the locals would never touch. All that is needed is
someone to help develop such ideas. The captial to start up such
an idea and advertise it is lacking in africa (mainly because the
west has been raping it for the last 500+ years).
> The only environmentalists that the oil company will want doing
> Governmentally required surveys will be very myopic and on their payroll.
All the more reason to force the issue and see what is really there.
This pipeline does not only affect killies. It will affect cichlids, frogs,
plants, birds etc... and people ultimately. While I do not say stop
the pipeline (even though oil may well be obsolete as a fuel in 10 to
20 years time) but I do say excersie some caution and know what
is out there.
I do not expect a warm response from the petrochem companies
but with some polite force a response should be forth coming be it
no.
As I said before the Chairman of the AKA should perhaps (if he
wants to take this further) contact his BKA, DKG etc...
counterparts as well as the ACA etc... and perhaps some
environmental lobbies and formulate a stratergy which should
include a list of preposed collectors and ecologists of international
standing.
As I said before, we can't expect them to stop constuction for one
little fish or frog but we can be constuctive with them and make
recomendations to reduce the risk of damage and perhaps make
preperations for follow up surveys.
Should the company pay? From a moral/ethecal stand point yes
but as RJ has pointed out they probably won't so alternative funding
may have to be found. Contacting the WWF may be a good start.
No not the WWF to go beat up the CEO of Chevron but the WWF
that cares for all the little elephants and rhinos and other dead
horses.
Bye
Tyrone Genade
tyronegenade at yahoo_com
http://www.geocities.com/tyronegenade
*************************************************************
P450 Lab, Biochemistry Department
University of Stellenbosch, 7602, South Africa
Ph: +27-021-808-5876, fax: +27-021-808-5863
**********************************************************
"Those who trust in the Lord for help will find their
strength renewed."
Isaiah 40:31
---------------
See http://www.aka.org/AKA/subkillietalk.html to unsubscribe
References: