Walking 4: Discovering London in one pair of pants

The temperature outside yesterday was either climbing toward, or was in, double digits, so... how could I not go for a walk before my hockey game?

I noticed the snow drops in Thames Park, hidden under leaves or closed tight just a few days before, were making a splash. And the butter cups I’d photographed and posted one week ago were now migrating, or blazing a new trail under a neighbour’s fence.



Warming temperatures have a downside too, I thought, as I continued toward home. In my lifetime, millions of people will be blazing trails from sea coast locations toward higher ground as water levels rise.


[NASA.gov; Please click here for more graphs and details]

I loosened my top button and turned for home.

Photos by G. Harrison.

***

Please click here to read Walking 3.

.

The Oil Barrel: We will do a lot of things differently

The toast popped up, hot to the touch (yup, I touched it - I live my life on the edge), I grabbed my favourite buttering knife, and slapped a layer of margarine over each waiting surface.

And as I did so, as is often the case, I remembered back to the days when preparing a highly nutritious breakfast wasn't quite so easy.

Travel back with me, if you dare, to 1955 and to the kitchen of the lovely wee home I lived in at that time.

"Gordon, get the Blue Bonnet margarine out of the fridge, okay?" said my mother.

"Sure, mom, I'd be happy to do that for you," I replied.

(If my mother was alive she would stare in disbelief at the above line. I usually had to be reminded several times to pay attention and heavily bribed to do even the simplest task).


I went to the fridge, pulled out the new box of margarine, opened it and withdrew a one pound packet of white margarine.

I flipped over the plastic packet and reached toward the brown gel button (it looked like a big belly button in the middle of a white tummy) and gave it a squeeze between a finger and thumb. It popped, released the liquid colouring agent, and I began rolling and squeezing the white olio and liquid together for several minutes until they mixed thoroughly to become "just the right shade of yellow" Blue Bonnet margarine.

With my duties done for the day, I ran outside in my pajamas and climbed a tree and started throwing eggs at passersby and my neighbour's dog. Or something like that. My memories are foggy. It was 1955, after all.

The old margarine squeezing scenario is forever gone because now margarine comes in plastic tubs and some machine has already done the mixing for us. We're so used to it being done for us that if any of us had to squeeze a gel pak and roll our own marg we'd probably moan and groan and write a letter to the editor of the nearest paper to say how tough life is. For sure, kids would look at their mother's as if she had horns and run outside in their pjs (do kids wear pajamas today?) and egg something. Egging would almost be an automatic response.

However, because oil consumption and prices have risen together steadily for almost 30 years and all aspects of life are getting more expensive - while I sit here and talk about gel buttons - we may all be doing a lot of things differently some day soon.

In fact, I think we already are and may not know it.

***

Please click here to read more from the Oil Barrel.

.

A Series of Some Significance: First, kill the codfish

[The following post was presented earlier in four separate parts. They are now combined for the sake of convenience - at no extra charge.]

Live Small Part 1 - Can you pick out this face?

Do you recognize the face? Do you know who it is?


[“Photo from Seacoasts of Canada by P. Berton”: GH]

Hard question, eh? And I’m not talking about the young child. I personally don’t have a clue. I’m talking about the two fish.

Do you recognize the face?

Allow me to give you a clue:

“Until the 1980s, the waters off the Grand banks teemed with cod - so many that the supply was deemed inexhaustible. Some thirty-five thousand people derived their living, directly or indirectly, from East Coast cod, which represented 10 percent of the world’s entire catch and helped make Canada the world’s largest exporter of fish.” (Ch. 8, Seacoasts of Canada)

I would wager that 9 of 10 Canadians would not know who it is. The days when a giant cod could dwarf a small boy are long gone.

The one on the right was five feet long and weighed sixty pounds. And though both were caught in a trap at Battle Harbour, Labrador, I would wager 5 of 10 Labradorians under the age of 30 have never seen a codfish this size. 10 of 10 likely never will again.

Today, when one sees cod for sale at the market, it will be a small one.

And it should remind us of big mistakes in the past from which we’ve learned but few lessons.

***

Live Small Part 2 - Mistakes charge compound interest

I wager that 9 of 10 Canadians wouldn’t recognize a giant codfish if they tripped over one.


[“Photo from Seacoasts of Canada by P. Berton”: GH]

However, 10 of 10 won’t likely ever be blessed with the opportunity to trip over one in their lifetime.

Why do I say this?

“...on July 2, 1992, with the celebratory clamour of Canada’s 125th birthday party still ringing in his ears, John Crosbie, then minister of fisheries and oceans, conceded a fact that he had earlier tried to deny but that a small group of scientists and inshore fishermen had already realized: the cod were gone.

“The situation was so desperate that all commercial fishing was outlawed for two years, a moratorium that had to be extended and is still in force. The shock that followed was like an earthquake: hard to believe, difficult to explain, not easy to accept.

“Since that time some Maritimers have talked wistfully of the “return” of the cod, as if some pelagic pied piper has spirited them away temporarily to lurk in an obscure backwater before returning to the fish pastures of Newfoundland. It is exactly that kind of wishful thinking that lies behind the original decline of the East Coast’s greatest natural resource.

“Like the salmon fishers of the West Coast and the prodigal whale hunters of the Arctic, human predators plundered the Atlantic of its bounty with little thought for the future, believing, against all evidence, that the supply of cod was limitless.” (Chapter 8, Seacoasts of Canada)

Such foolish mistakes - “nature will supply all forever” - charge high compound interest.


[“There are limits to what we can and should do.”]

Almost 20 years have past since thousands of Newfoundlanders pinned their hopes on the limitless supply of cod. Two decades of tough times some would surely say.

But they’re a rugged, proud people. Many have survived to this day by other means.

Many now trust that the Alberta oil sands and offshore oil and tourist dollars will keep the home fires burning.

I wish them all well and that the lessons learned about East Coast cod will help those living on another East Coast - in a land far away - escape the same upheavals.

***

Live Small Part 3 - Sharks are falling into the jaws of man

I have almost finished reading Carl Safina’s book, song for the blue ocean’, 440 pages of dense material and the world’s smallest font.

(Please see ‘Read This’, side margin. I highly recommend the book, and was happy to hear recently my youngest son has started into it).

Throughout, a ‘live small’ philosophy is encouraged, based on Safina’s first-hand observations of some of mankind’s insatiable appetites.

Earlier I mentioned events on the East Coast of Canada. Now we travel to another East Coast, simultaneously so different yet much the same.

“Hong Kong is a modern metropolis of six million bust souls, a comfortable, clean, safe, hustling city, with dense morning mists, workers on bamboo lattices building skyscrapers, and businesses and products with names like Very Good Trading Company and Double Happiness Cigarettes.” (pg. 404, song for the blue ocean)

And everywhere, shops.

“Ah! The place we have been looking for. Baskets and tubs of live frogs, turtles, salamanders, and aquarium plants clutter the sidewalks. Shop after shop (many selling cyanide caught fish that die immediately after eating their first large meal because their innards have been severely damaged by the poison) of live aquarium fishes line the street.”

The following sign caught Safina’s eye:

“We import all kinds raw shark fins, make all kinds shark fin products, selling shark fins, shark fin fiber.”



[“Shark fin soup - a high price in many ways”: PHOTO LINK]

As you’ll soon see, the Chinese use shark fins in much the same way my mother once used oatmeal. The same way, but very different again too.

“In the backs of many shops here, workers are drying and skinning the fins, then soaking them to get the fibers used in making soup. (A bowl of shark fin soup can cost $90.)”

“I pick up a package of shark fin fibers packed in cellophane, and in the directions on the back the secret of making shark fin soup is revealed to me for the first time:

Cook two hours with ham or chicken, in chicken broth.

“I stare at this for a few moments and read it twice. I can’t get over this! We are demolishing sharks worldwide to make ham-flavored chicken soup? I had heard that the fins add texture but no flavor. Apparently, this is true.

(My mother used to toss a handful of oatmeal into her meatloaf - not for texture - in order to make it go farther.)

“In my own wasteful throwaway society, we do not appreciate the real value of so many things. Here, so many things are wasted because they are valued in ways that are not real.

“In every restaurant we’ve been to in Hong Kong, various soups featuring shark fins are an entire section in the menu. Just as buffalo tongues, passenger pigeons, and cranes once graced the menus of fancy restaurants in America.” (pg. 403)

Gone are the days of the five-foot-long cod fish on Canada’s East Coast.

Hopefully, soon, gone will be the days of slashing shark fins off the back of a shark (only to dispose of the rest, in many cases, in the ocean) to add texture to chicken soup.

Soon?

***

Live Small Part 4: First the cod, then the shark, then the...

Gone are the days of the five-foot-long cod fish on Canada’s East Coast.

Soon, gone also will be the days of slashing shark fins off the backs of sharks just to add texture to chicken soup - hopefully because of wise conservation efforts.

Concerning conservation efforts, you shouldn’t hold your breath, at least according to ‘song for the blue ocean’ by Carl Safina. (The book comes highly recommended: see ‘Read This’, side margin).

Safina writes, “The U.N. reports that the “tragedy of sharks” is that, while their valuable fins make them targets, sharks contribute so little economically compared to other fishes that their research and management is a low priority, even if shark populations are depleted. This means “little hope for viable management consistent with both economic and conservation interests.”

In other words, if sharks were more valuable as a commodity we would kill them faster, likely until it was too late to save them as a species.

“Heavy fishing exerts so unnatural a pressure, such high mortality in the face of such slow reproduction (sharks are a late-maturing fish; some bear only a few young per young), that sharks are simply unequipped by evolution to withstand it.

“In almost all cases where sharks have been targeted by commercial fisheries, they have been depleted within a few years, yet global shark fishing and trade are expanding virtually unregulated and uncontrolled... people also catch sharks for skins that can be tanned into valuable leather, for oils, and for cartilage used to make the bogus “anti-cancer” pills now sold in many Western countries.

“Because of this, shark populations in most areas of the globe have declined rapidly.” (pg. 402)

As I read ‘song for the blue ocean’ the list of animal extinctions depletions, on land and in water, grew longer.


Codfish, shark, reef fish, salmon, tuna, whale, and so on.

Fortunately, the song held a few positive notes.

Sustainable practices, sometimes against overwhelming odds, have taken hold in various regions of the world, though the grip of such practices is tenuous at best.

Again, I recommend the book. (I found two copies at Chapters before Christmas for $5.99.) With each page the “live small” philosophy is encouraged.

Live small. Live simply. Love your neighbour. Maintain a sense of humour.

Reduce spending. Pay down debts. Save money for tough times ahead.

.

My New Economic Plan Pt 3: Get small before you get low

So many reasons. So little time.

If we get small (or reduce our footprint or lifestyle or level of consumption) before we get low (or kick the proverbial galvanized metal bucket) then those alive today will have a better chance of enjoying some of what the world offers without so much strain (or mental, emotional, financial, physical stress).

(I’ve been told galvanized metal is the way to go, as far as rain gutters, bicycle fenders and buckets are concerned, eh).

Oh, and future generations would find their lives a bit easier too. Let’s not forget them while we’re trying to make our way in this world.

(Please read My New Economic Plan Pt 1 for some context).

If concerns about a double scoop recession in the US, Canada’s dependence upon the US economy, a slow down in the economies of the G7 nations (including Canada and the US) and the price paid for John Lennon’s toilet seat aren’t motivation enough to get small, then a wee peak at American budget deficits and US national debt might get you there.

(Please read My New Economic Plan Pt 2 for even more context).


["Debt is growing. Will it soon surpass GDP? It has in other countries"]

For example, US debt as a percent of gross domestic product (GDP) was very high in the 1940s, but declined - likely due to many productive years and somewhat controlled spending and taxation practices - until the Reagan-Bush era.

Reagan- and Bush-onomics and other factors (higher military spending?) led to growing annual budget deficits (money going out exceeded money coming in yearly) and the overall national debt rose steeply compared to the value of domestic production.


["Bill got close to having one balanced budget"]

Pres. Bill Clinton worked hard to lower annual budget deficits from 1993 - 2000 (and reduce US debt as a percent of GDP) but the training wheels again came off under Bush 2. And Obama’s attempts to stimulate the American economy (among other things) has led to another sharp spike in debt compared to GDP.

According to one graph - found at zfacts.com - as of Aug. 15, 2010, US debt stood at almost 91% of GDP. Total debt is almost as high as domestic production. It’s unsustainable, for certain.

Total debt - now at $13.5 trillion - is going through the roof, so to speak. According to the red bar graph, national debt has doubled in the last seven years, i.e. from 2003 to 2010.


["Growing debt should concern us all"]

Should we be concerned about the debt’s rapid growth?

Should we be concerned that, according to the red bar graph, there has only been one year since 1940 that the debt actually went down?

Enough to get small before we get low?

Please click here to read My New Economic Plan Pt 4.

***

Good things happened in 1947. The US paid down part of its debt.

However, since 1948 it has only gone skyward.

Has 62 years of over-spending affected our view of how the world should work?

E.g., are our material expectations realistic?

I was born in 1949 (baby, I was there, eh!), so I have a few opinions.

.

Deforest City Blues: Is it the summer of your discontent? Pt 3

Some might accuse me of seeing life through rose-coloured glasses.

I say, if you’ve got ‘em,wear ‘em.


‘Cause it’s tough sledding out there and for many there won’t be clear sailing for a long time, if ever.

Why, according to a special report in The London Free Press (July 31), some people are even thinking about moving out of Deforest City. Where to? I don’t know. Maybe Mexico?

I do know, however, most comments listed in the special report (‘The summer of discontent’) seem to indicate that increasing expenses, taxes, taxes upon taxes, levies upon levies and just about any form of government one can name are to blame.

The comments from 19 readers were peppered with exclamation points and strident questions.

Let’s look at a few more closely.

“Moving out of the city seems to be the answer.” (Pete, July 31, London Free Press)

Really? Moving out of the city seems to be the answer?

I don’t think so, unless you get more for your house than you paid for it, buy into a smaller mortgage, live more frugally (in a rural community or along a country road) than you do now and can adopt a new lifestyle far from your current lines of support and employment.


["Where would you go? Cleveland is so far away!: photos GH]

(Moving away has its pitfalls. Think about it. Get back to me).

“Is there going to be anyone left with money?”

Yes, plenty of people, but their numbers are being trimmed while we speak.

Many people have more money than they know what to do with and will be living in their big house with smoke pouring from fat steaks on their BBQ long after their neighbours go belly up.

If you have a relative like that and are feeling the pinch, start getting on good terms with them. Say nice things to them next time you see them. E.g., “What a nice basement you have. A whole other family could live down here when tough times arrive. Hey, I like the smell of your aftershave.” Stuff like that.

Some other people - not in the super rich category - will have money because they know how to live - get this - not only within their means but under their means.

(“Live under your means” should be my phrase of the week - I like it so much).

People who are in the habit of saving money regularly rather than spending it as if there is no tomorrow will still have money 20 years after their neighbours move away to live in a relative’s basement.

In other words, some people will be left with money even if energy costs, etc. rise again, and again. And costs will rise.

Marc made this comment:

“Hoping people will conserve through higher rates is idiocy.”

I disagree.

How long have we known that we consume an endless list of resources excessively, in needless, wasteful ways? During good times, when resources are cheap and plentiful, we seldom put some away for future use or for the next generation. You’ll run out of fingers counting up resources our grandchildren will require that are now under attack.

Reducing consumption voluntarily doesn’t work. We just want more.

But if gas, water, oil, pizza, hydro, land, clothing, cement, lumber, milk, copper, bread... (whoops, I’m out of fingers) ...prices go up, we’ll buy or use less.

Attacking the wallet works. Colourful ads about water shortages don’t.

In the 19 comments from readers I only read one that didn’t clearly lay discontent at the feet of the provincial or city government or the person who puts price stickers on bread.

Dee said, “We have to do something about this, but what? Does anyone have any suggestions other than griping? I’m open to suggestions.”

Let’s answer Dee’s questions, shall we?

But first, a walk on the beach, to think, to get to the root of the problems we face.


["Walk the beach. Try Pt. Bruce, but take running shoes"]

Man cannot live by bread alone.

Link to Series: Please click here to read Discontent Pt 4

***

If the beach is too far away then walk around the block.

Several times.

Shaun said, “Well people of London, bend over. The only ones not bending over are the politicians.”

Surely, after a quiet walk, we'll do better than that.

.

So, the Harmonized Sales Tax has ruffled a few feathers Pt 2

I wouldn’t even be thinking about the upcoming HST if one of my older sisters had not sent the following (mass) email, a part of her mini-protest against the tax:

“Hello. Next summer (2010) the Ontario Government is set to put into force its new harmonized GST/PST sales tax which will apply a 13% sales tax to everything we purchase.

Things That Were Not Subject To The Current 8% PST Will Be Now Taxed.”

I know the email is supposed to make me feel a certain way (“My gosh. More evil taxes. Will it never end? Did my head just fall off?”) and the second line with all the capital letters is supposed to drive it deep into my skull (“If you’re not sweating bullets BY NOW, you should be!”)


Sorry. What do we expect?

And, won’t Ontarians simply shrink their spending to accommodate the tax as we have done related to the recession? (“Fifty-three per cent of those asked have cut spending on clothes and related items” - from recent consumer confidence survey)

And isn’t that a good thing? After 60 years of more sugary sweet apple pie (in a material sense) than our stretchy jeans can manage, isn’t it a good thing to slow our consumption?

Canadians stand in 3rd place when it comes to greenhouse gas emissions per capita, only behind the USA and Australia.

Here in Ontario, we won’t lower our lifestyle voluntarily, so a consumption tax like the HST may have a very positive outcome.

My sister doesn’t think so, but then, she’s likely not alone.

***

Where do you stand on the HST, or taxes in general?

.

When you heard PM Harper was going to China, did you...

hope he would stay there?

smile knowingly because economic junkets always pay off?

or switch to the Leafs game?

Whatever the case, PM Harper seems optimistic and if a trip to China (and India) will keep him away from photo ops at the piano for awhile then it’s fine with me.

Plus, his stated goals are good for a laugh.

About his December trip to China he said (reported in the Oct. 29 issue of The London Free Press), “Our two countries enjoy a growing partnership, sharing significant interests in trade and investment, the environment and regional security.”


China and Canada are interested in the environment?


China leads the world in carbon emissions by country and Canada is in the top three per capita. Together they’re going to agree to reduce their emissions?

I wait with bated breath.

Pa da pum.

.

I think I have the key to the wind turbine debate

On Saturday I enjoyed a lengthy and sometimes heated debate re pros and cons related to a proposed group of wind turbines on the Bruce Peninsula.

Final score:

Men from the Bruce - 3

Man from Deforest City - 3

As two friends and I drove past a long row of turbines near Kincardine yesterday on our way back home to London we hit upon the key to the whole debate about energy production, whether by coal, nuclear fission, water or wind turbines.

“One thing that would take some of the heat out of all the talk is public education about the benefits of energy conservation,” I said.


["Unplug the machines - conserve energy": photo GAH]

The three of us all agreed we live in a society driven by consumption, yet we were as happy as clams sharing a small room over a garage for the weekend. And not buying anything. Just visiting with others.

We all knew people addicted to shopping. Keeping up with the Joneses. Needing the next new thing. With closets full of clothes. Garages full of unused or little-used STUFF.

We agreed we have so many material things in our own homes that require attention our own free time is often kept to the minimum. And we’re all retired, for Pete’s sake.

We agreed it made sense to conserve money and energy etc., and spend more time enjoying the natural world we have around us.

***

Can we unplug the machines more often? Unplug ourselves?

.

Young at Heart: I’ll put my paint brush where my mouth is

Yeah, that was me. I suggested London City Hall should give over some sidewalks to cyclists and paint them blue. Robin egg blue.

Paint the sidewalks. Not the cyclists.

My reasons:

Robin egg blue paint is cheaper than building new bike paths

Some sidewalks don’t get much pedestrian use so a trial run would only put 3 noses out of joint in Hyde Park.

Not kidding. I walked from White Hills to Hyde Park at the beginning of summer (wrote a brilliant column about it), had coffee at Ungers, bought cherry tomatoes at Van Horiks, and encountered only one other pedestrian while walking the whole time. Even the one I did see turned around and took his doggy back home when he saw me with my vegetables. He was likely overwhelmed by the fact someone else was using the sidewalk. In broad daylight.


["Such a lovely colour for a bike path"]

Another reason:

There aren’t thousands of cyclists, I know (city planners have accommodated cars, trucks, SUVs etc. for so long many people have actually fallen in love with the interiors of their vehicles and have forgotten what their legs and feet are there for), but more people might be encouraged to dust off their two-wheelers if there were several safe routes (or even one) to get to a mall, downtown, hair dressers, Dollar Store, Timmies (_______ insert another place you could cycle to that’s dear to your heart).

And, this is where my paint brush comes in: If City Hall designates the sidewalk on one side of Cathcart St. as a bike route, I volunteer to paint it between Duchess and Bruce.

(I mean Bruce Street, not Big Bruce Henderson).

***

Got a paint brush?

.

My Point of View: License bicyclists? We’d be spinning our wheels

Nicholas H., Delaware, thinks it’s time to “license cyclists and educate them to the fact they are not the only ones using our busy roads.” (Letter to the Editor, Sept. 21 issue of London Free Press)

But the behaviours he is concerned about (i.e., “cyclists sail through stop signs, ignore red lights and generally abuse common sense road rules so they can reach their destinations without slowing down”) can all be attributed to licensed drivers as well.

Licenses don’t come with a lifetime supply of common sense.

Tickets occasionally solve a person’s bad habits. Maybe we need more police to enforce the rules that are already there? Cameras? How about cameras busy corners?

While people debate the best way to control driving habits, whether in a car or on a bike, allow me to say that a lot of problems would be solved on our congested streets if cyclists had safer spaces in which to ride.

Click here for more brilliant details.

I admit, even with more separate routes, there will still be the odd maroon on a bike, just as there are maroonic drivers on the 401 or 407 - with licenses. Really, go count ‘em.

***

Convert some sidewalks to path paths? A good idea?

.

Give cyclists 20 per cent of Deforest City’s sidewalks

And paint them blue. No signage will be needed.

As I said recently, the stories and issues related to city cyclists are never-ending.

After 60 - 70 years of successfully accommodating more cars and trucks than necessary - at great expense - our City Fathers and Mothers could easily and fairly accommodate cyclists without having to widen existing bike paths, allocate piles of money (literally, piles) to build new ones or kick cars off one of their lanes on some busy streets.

All that’s needed are buckets of light blue paint (I think robin egg blue would be lovely. Thanks for asking).

Paint 20 per cent of London’s sidewalks (east - west, north - south, a couple of the zigzaggy ones) robin egg blue and ask pedestrians to use the other side of the street to play it safe.

“What if I live in a house that faces a blue sidewalk and I wanna walk downtown?”

Walk to the other side of the road. Look both ways for cars and cyclists. Then walk, walk, walk, 'til your heart's content.

“What if I still can’t cycle to where I’m going on the blue sidewalks?”

Use the road on occasion. Stick to the right side of the lane. Wear a helmet.

“What if it robin egg blue doesn’t match my shutters?”

Talk to the Mayor. I’ll be outta town.

(Okay, that’s a lie. I’ll be in my workshop. But talk to the Mayor anyway.)

***

20 per cent is a good start. Only 4 pedestrians would have to make a bit of accommodation.

Thoughts?

.

The Suicidal Planet: Sounds like homicide to me, so go jogging

In The Suicidal Planet, a lovely book written by Mayer Hillman (with a little help from his friends), I read the following last night while riding my exercise bike:

(See, I was sweating for two reasons).

“The increase in carbon dioxide concentrations has been caused by human activities, primarily the burning of fossil fuels. Their use and the global emissions of carbon dioxide that stem from it are rising quickly”

(GH: Maybe not as quickly as last year, due to the Great Recession. Maybe we should schedule our next recession asap.)


“If no action is taken to reduce greenhouse gas emissions this increase (in global temperatures) could be in excess of the temperature difference between the last Ice Age and now. This would be disastrous for the climate, the environment, and the world’s population.”

(GH: Just because you’re not old enough to remember the last Ice Age - note the capitals; it was a significant event - doesn’t mean it wasn’t a powerful force).

“In the United States, each person’s contribution to carbon dioxide emissions is about five times the world average.”

Re that last point: Canada and Australia are right behind the USA in greenhouse gas emissions.


I concluded the following after breaking into a sweat (two sweats, to be fair):

A personal ‘live small’ philosophy needs to become a political and social philosophy.

***

Be a smaller consumer. Go jogging as often as possible.

Yes, walking is okay too. It’s the perfect speed for enjoying your natural surroundings

.

Something is definitely wrong with Canada’s economic model

This from the Sept. 12 issue of The London Free Press:

“The recession is confusing a lot of consumers who are told to save money for a rainy day but also are encouraged to spend to help boost the economy.

“It's a conundrum economists call "the paradox of thrift," which means too much savings can lead to an overall drop in consumption and threaten a nation's economic growth.”

So, should I save (which is almost the same as reducing my debt load - a very good thing) or buy that leaf blower so we can build more items we hardly need?


["All we need is love": Ollie and his dad]

Hmmmm.... sounds like an easy choice, doesn’t it?

Not when we live in a land with 60 - 100 years worth of materialistic momentum, and that wants to maintain an excessive lifestyle for as many as possible - for as long as possible.

Not when we live in a land that barely knows word one about conservation and preserving limited resources for future generations.

My recommendation:

Save your money. Reduce your personal or family debt. Live smaller each year.

Take quiet moments and think about how little you need to spend on stuff to be really happy.

Think about what rampant consumerism has done to your province, country, planet - besides fill your basement and garage with stuff you seldom use or need.

Live small and prosper.

.

What’s normal weather? “There isn’t a normal anymore”

“I think they have to get used to the fact there isn’t a ‘normal’ (anymore).”

The speaker, D. Harford, head of the Adaption to Climate Change Team in Vancouver, was referring to governments and citizens as ‘they’ consider Canadian weather patterns and preparedness levels for volatile conditions (as reported in the Sept. 10 issue of The London Free Press).

The statement was made as a national research group headed by Gordon McBean, a London Nobel Prize-winner, was reporting that “Canada should establish a national climate action centre to help plan for, and respond to, increasingly volatile weather” - and the words ‘there isn’t a normal’ caught my attention.


[Photo GAH]

The national research group’s report presents enough hurdles to governments and citizens to last a lifetime.

I.E., “the report calls for closer collaboration among governments and individuals to design communities better able to withstand weather calamities. It also calls for a national system that can alert people to weather hazards.”

Collaboration? A national system?

It could happen, over time, much time.

But it might take us longer still to accept a new normal related to weather, one that includes increased weather volatility, an unravelling of predictable weather patterns, a climate that seems to be in conflict with our ideas concerning how it should behave.

Too long have we lived with the belief we can do as we wish to the environment, often for the sake of a booming economy and a larger-than-needed lifestyle.

Normal is now out the window and gone. Change is now the new normal.

***

No time like the present to make the transition to The Small Economy.

Live small and prosper.

.

Live Small and Prosper: The ‘Small Economy’ has a big future

Future generations will thank the Corporation of the City of London for it’s economic action plan (it’s coming soon to a big blue binder near you) if it is practical, sustainable, affordable, understandable and good-looking.

Nothing short of that will do.


["The buzz is coming": photo GAH]

“More than 200 leaders of London business, labour, education, finance, government and other agencies will brainstorm this Thursday in a bid to devise an economic action plan,” begins an article in this morning’s London Free Press, and in my expert opinion, they’d better get it right this time because they don’t have many kicks at the can left and our unemployment rates are through the roof (11.1 per cent vs 8.7 nationally).

My suggestion:

Grow the Small Economy.

I.E., Begin the transition from homes, cars, appliances, furniture, roads, sidewalks, box stores and businesses (for starters) that are bigger than needed to meet our basic needs (related to food, clothing, shelter, communication, transportation and recreation).

Build smaller homes at lower prices. Smaller apartment units that require smaller furniture. Smaller cars that require smaller motors and tires. Smaller stores with smaller shelves for fewer items. (How many kinds of mustard or shampoo do we really need?)

Sounds like a lot of manufacturing to me!

Why, if our city was the first to used advanced technologies to help a family of four live as happily as clams in a 999 sq. ft. house close to all amenities, the world would flock to our front door.

Well, maybe not ‘the world,’ but I bet the buzz would as great as that made by the yellow jackets that swarm the Western Fair every September.

***

Am I onto something here?

.

Believe it or Not: There is another suicidal planet, with a twist

I’ve just started to read ‘The Suicidal Planet: How to prevent global climate catastrophe,’ so the following opening line to a recent news article caught my eye:

“Washington - Astronomers have found what appears to be a suicidal planet.”

[They’re not referring to Earth. Link to full article]

I thought it should read “another suicidal planet,” based on what I’ve read so far in my recent book purchase.

re Earth: “Only the radical rethinking of our relationship with nature can save the earth’s ecology for future generations... but, remarkably, an air of procrastination still prevails. Greenhouse gas emissions are accumulating at an alarming rate, but, in the absence of radical policy change, our day-to-day lives continue as usual.”

One twist with the newest discovery in space - the planet is not inhabited by humans, and is causing its own destruction.

.

The Suicidal Planet: The Muskoka cottage leaves a large footprint

The following is from a recently purchased book:

“In 1993, Al Gore, then American Vice President, observed that our civilization is in denial about its addiction to the consumption of the planet’s nonrenewable resources bringing us to the brink of catastrophe. In emphasizing the need for development of a strategic environmental initiative, he wrote: “Only the radical rethinking of our relationship with nature can save the earth’s ecology for future generations.” [pg. 2, The Suicidal Planet]


While in Bracebridge for the weekend, my brother-in-law told me how many small cottagers are leaving the nearby lakes because they can’t afford the growing taxes.

Small, old cottages are then bulldozed to the ground to make make room for much larger models, pushing assessments higher still.

“Sometimes they’re 3 - 4,000 sq. ft. just for two people. This kind of stupid development can’t last forever,” he said.

I hope not, I thought. There won’t be any nature left to show the grandkids.

.

The Suicidal Planet: Looks like it will hit many bases

I usually can’t get out of Chapters for under 20 bucks.

I like travelogues (via motorcycle please) and Long Way Down caught my eye recently. I read it while riding my recumbent exercise bike and I’m now in the middle of Africa with Ewan and Charley and in better shape for hockey, to boot.

I like books about nature’s conflict with mankind and picked up The Suicidal Planet at the same time.

So far, it has hit familiar bases, but promises more.

“The greenhouse gases we have been emitting - mainly carbon dioxide from our energy use - will remain in the atmosphere for centuries, in turn causing changes for millennia as the earth slowly reacts. Future generations will bear the heaviest burden for the present generation’s irresponsibility. Time is of the essence. Every year that goes by without an appropriate response reduces the chances of averting an ecological Armageddon and makes the changes required by current and future inhabitants of the planet an increasingly uphill struggle.”

When I was 14 my biggest worry was whether I could impress my oldest sister’s girlfriends or not by wearing a new t-shirt.

My grandson, age 3 in December, will have much different and greater concerns, because, we are slow to act.

.

Gord’s Grilled Goby: I’m onto something in a non-invasive way

I recently read that the bottom-feeding, aggressive goby has invaded many of SW Ontario’s lakes, rivers and streams - and had two immediate and enlightening reactions.

Nature is under attack from an invasive critter - and this time, it’s not man.


["Looks harmless enough, but it ain't": photo link]

But maybe man can help nature fight back.

"The goby is a bottom-dwelling fish that has great potential for causing impacts on Great Lakes fisheries. The round goby takes over prime spawning sites traditionally used by native species, competing with native fish for habitat and changing the balance of the ecosystem." [More information]

Now that sockeye salmon stocks are declining in Canada (see post below) perhaps we can turn our attention to the goby, in the same way Australians did concerning rabbits when that furry creature (to my bearded Aussie friend - I’m referring to the rabbits here) started to take over the continent down under.

Since most North Americans like to eat just about anything in sight perhaps we could add Goby on a Stick to our weekly menu.

Charcoal flavoured Goby, BBQ’d Goby w Lemon Sauce, Grilled Goby w Guinness - all winners.

My suggestion: Use our insatiable appetite to reduce the numbers of this invasive species.

[Originally the round goby and the tubenose goby were introduced into the St. Claire River in 1990, probably via contaminated ballast water of transoceanic ships. Round goby are thriving in the Great Lakes Basin because they are aggressive, voracious feeders which can forage in total darkness.]

***

I’m onto something, aren’t I?

.

Nature’s wealth is going through a recession too

Natural sockeye salmon numbers are down so low in the Fraser River that one day soon the majority of Canadians may be reduced to eating a factory farm replacement.


["The number returning from the sea - down substantially": photo link]

The lower quality replacement will sit on our plates alongside our factory farm pork, beef, chicken and lamb. (I’d include wieners but I think they’re still made from real chicken lips).

My suggestion: Reduce your intake of fish and meat, reduce our reliance on factory food, and give nature and natural herds a chance to rebound.

Ten to twenty years ought to do it and our average weight per person might return to near normal levels.

***

Want to lose five pounds before Christmas?

Reduce meat in your meals by 50 per cent and skip the second helpings at Thanksgiving.

Am I onto something?

.