The pelican in this photo struggles after BP’s oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico reached an island park many miles away. It is ludicrous to think that designating an area as a marine park will protect it from oil spills. Yet this trade-off is often used to help convince environmentalists to accept offshore oil development and supertankers.
Sometimes environmentalists are even promised marine park funding for science and jobs.
The tiny village of Kitkatla though impoverished, said no to fishfarms to protect the Skeena’s wild salmon. If they can sacrifice like that surely relatively wealthy environmentalists with many opportunities can find other ways to achieve their conservation goals, than to consider even for a second, quietly acquiescing to toxic bitumen supertankers.
To see how this ploy is being used in California visit:
“There are five points that are key to understanding the truth about the alleged “marine protected areas” that went into effect in Southern California waters today.
First, these “marine reserves” were created by the MLPA “Blue Ribbon Task Force” for the South Coast chaired by Catherine Reheis-Boyd, the president of the Western States Petroleum Association. Reheis-Boyd is a big oil industry lobbyist with an egregious conflict of interest in the designation of MPAs, considering that she has repeatedly called for new oil drilling off the California coast and the weakening of environmental regulations, as well as supporting environmentally destructive Canadian tar sands drilling”