COW ELECTION 2014
LIVE CAM HWY 97 @ WESTSIDE RD
CHBC TV News
Joe Rich Community
Kelowna Daily Courier
Vernon Daily Courier
Bennett Bridge Cam
Interior Highway Cams
District of Central Okanagan
of Okanagan Similkameen
District of Peachland
City of Penticton
City of Vernon
District of West Kelowna
Kelowna's Best Rock
RDCO Board Calender
RDCO Meeting Schedule
RDCO Board Reports
RDCO Board Agenda
RDCO Board Minutes
Gov Service Agenda
Gov Service Minutes
RDCO GIS Map
Westside Rd. Maps
Westside Rd Interchange
Westside Rd COMPLAINT FORM
Jobs in Vernon
Jobs in Kelowna
Food Action Society
BCGov FOI form
BC Forest Fire Info
BC Wildfires of Note
Kelowna Yacht Club Wind Direction/Speed
okanaganlakebc.ca on Twitter
OKANAGAN LAKE B.C.
January 26, 2015
Click on your refresh button in the top menu, to
be sure you see any updates.
Fill out the form to make a comment on
Pesticides are safe if used properly says scientist
By Jennifer Smith - Kelowna Capital News -
Published: January 31, 2009
Anything can kill you, it’s the dose that counts, according to Keith
Solomon, a toxicologist with the University of Guelph who spoke at
the Environmental Plant Management Associations’ conference Friday
about using pesticides.
On Thursday, during the conference, another speaker, a pesticide
advocate, challenged the industry to sue those who disagree with
using the products.
By Friday afternoon, the troops were rallying behind the cause with
conference conveners encouraging industry professionals not to have
a knee-jerk reaction to reports in media that speak out in favour of
Kelowna’s cosmetic pesticide ban—particularly if they quote the UBCO
English professor (or his wife) who are leading the rally against
For his part, Solomon encouraged his audience to use the products
judiciously, as simply any other tool in its arsenal, and tried to
provide some facts for the fight.
“It’s very difficult for the public, for politicians, to
differentiate between the potential for harm and risk,” he said.
Pound enough sugar, salt or egg white into a body and eventually you
will kill a person, he said. It’s the same principle with the
Provided people follow the safety guidelines and use the products
sparingly, they offer far more benefits than potential for harm, he
In Kenya, 70 per cent of the population is involved in food
production, whereas only two per cent of North Americans are, said
Solomon, noting that those who criticize these products tend to be
the ones who benefited the most from their existence.
“In Africa, they’re trying to get more pesticides,” he said.
As someone who tests the products prior to them reaching the market
he said it’s generally the user, not the product, that causes
In North America, pesticides are directly responsible for only
hundreds of poisonings versus thousands in the developing world
where those spraying the products tend not to have the same
protective gear and safety standards available to them.
As for Canadian pesticide bans, like the one instituted in Ontario,
Solomon encouraged his audience to question the fine print, as it
were, pointing to some obvious flaws in the logic.
In that case, some very toxic insecticides, like pyrethrins, are
fully permitted if they are used for health or safety reasons—like
killing a wasps’ nest.
Solomon suggested the testing is thorough and so-called cancer
epidemics, linked to the products are unrealistic when one considers
that the statistics, don’t reflect an increase in cancers in Canada
at all—at least if age and the population increase are factored into
Pesticides offer a $3 to $4 return on the dollar investment for
growers—not much if they are not used sparingly, he said.
“Sometimes you just need that exact socket wrench for that exact
size nut and there’s no other tool in the tool box that will do,” he
jsmith [at] kelownacapnews.com
Sue anti-pesticide policitians: consultant
By Judie Steeves - Kelowna Capital News -
Published: January 29, 2009
The pesticide application
industry should sue municipalities, councillors and environmental
activists who advocate for, and pass, bylaws restricting the use of
pesticides—particularly when such actions are based on fraudulent
information, says an Ontario pesticide proponent.
“Sue council members who say the products you use are detrimental to
the environment or public health,” Jeffery Lowes told members of the
Integrated and Environmental Plant Management Association meeting in
Kelowna council’s new pesticide regulation bylaw is now in effect,
but it isn’t a full ban on the use of pesticides, only on the use of
them for cosmetic purposes—except by trained applicators, noted John
Vos, general manager for citizen’s services.
Lowes, a consulting investigator who is leading the fight against
pesticide bans in Ontario, told delegates there isn’t anything
concrete to support activists’ claims that pesticides cause harm to
the environment or public health.
“2,4-D is probably the safest product you have access to,” he told
the landscapers and pesticide applicators.
Most of the bylaws won’t stand up in court, he said. The turfgrass
industry is planning to sue in Ontario, he added.
He also claimed there are no economic benefits to a ban on pesticide
use, but Vos feels Kelowna’s bylaw likely would be of benefit to
trained applicators, because it prevents the untrained from applying
He said he doesn’t think Kelowna’s bylaw is in jeopardy.
Kelowna Coun. Robert Hobson agreed, noting council has the power to
regulate pesticides. The new bylaw was the result of interest from
the public, and it will be enforced by complaints from the public.
The regional district had already made the decision not to use
pesticides in its public parks, and council received letters from
doctors and from Interior Health supporting the new restrictions.
Even the industry is trying to reduce the amount of pesticides that
are applied, by using such alternatives as Integrated Pest
Management or IPM principles, he noted.
As a farmer, he said pesticides are one of the most expensive costs
of growing, so orchardists are not hesitant to use such alternatives
as the Sterile Insect Release program to reduce their use.
He said he voted in favour of it because of a desire to have less
pesticide use in the community, and also because of a “concern about
the way people apply them,” he said.
jsteeves [at] kelownacapnews.com
Alberta’s tar sands are a real-life environmental horror show
Kelowna Capital News - Opinion - Published:
December 13, 2008
If you want to be scared, you don’t need to watch a horror movie or
read the latest Stephen King bestseller.
Real terror can be found by simply firing up Google Earth, the
computer program that allows users to look at satellite pictures of
any place on the planet. By mousing over and zooming in, you can see
what Alberta’s tar sands look like from space.
It is not a pretty sight. In fact, it’s scary – and for good reason.
A recent book by celebrated journalist Andrew Nikiforuk, Tar Sands:
Dirty Oil and the Future of a Continent (published by Greystone
Books and the David Suzuki Foundation), explores what these grey
spots on Google Earth mean to Canada’s environment and economy.
The scale of the Alberta tar sands project is unprecedented in
Canadian history. Alberta’s “blue-eyed sheiks”, as the oil-industry
elite are known, stand to make billions of dollars from carving up
northern Alberta in order to meet U.S. demand for oil. But these
dollars pale in comparison to the environmental value that is being
squandered at the expense of petrodollars.
The main tar sands deposits are at three sites in Alberta: Peace
River, Cold Lake, and Athabasca. The Athabasca region contains the
largest deposit of crude bitumen in the world.
All of this bitumen, a complex mixture of molecules from prehistoric
life, is a geological miracle with which Canada has been blessed.
This bitumen could turn out to be a substance that will help our
children and grandchildren in ways that we can’t even imagine today,
much the same way our ancestors couldn’t have imagined us using
silicon in our computer chips. But instead of safeguarding this
resource, we are using it up. We are creating an environmental
catastrophe that will take centuries to recover from, if at all.
The tar sands consist of a mixture of silica sand, minerals, clay,
water, and most importantly, crude bitumen. The process of
converting bitumen so that we can use it to power our cars, heat our
homes, and transport our food is not easy.
It’s estimated that two tonnes of earth must be excavated to produce
one barrel of thick tar-like bitumen. And it requires as much as
three barrels of fresh water from the Athabasca River to make one
barrel of bitumen. It also takes a huge amount of energy to extract
the oil from the sands. Canada exports one million barrels of
bitumen to the United States.
In the media, we hear that tar sands will provide oil companies with
tremendous profits in the future, but there’s been very little
discussion about what happens next. Even hardened energy experts
agree that relying on oil-soaked sand to meet North America’s energy
needs means that we’re nearing the end of the cheap-oil era.
We know that our lifestyles must change. We know that burning fossil
fuels such as oil and gas creates smog that harms our health and
creates global warming. We know that global warming poses an
incredible threat to humanity. We also know that there are
solutions, such as creating a future based on renewable sources,
increasing conservation efforts, and rethinking society so that we
protect our quality of life without destroying the planet in the
With all the money being made from the tar sands, very little of it
seems to be reinvested in renewable energy that comes from wind,
solar, biomass, and geothermal sources. If anything, we could be
investing this money in low-carbon projects so that we won’t have to
pull every bit of bitumen from the ground.
When my children were younger, they’d often ask me about the
bogeyman – a mythical evil spirit who’d lie in wait under their beds
when the lights went out. But maybe the bogeyman isn’t some scary
creature. Maybe the bogeyman is simply a man in a suit trying to
satisfy his shareholders, make a profit, and cosy up to federal
politicians so he can continue doing his work without having to
answer to his environmental crimes.
Or maybe there’s something more frightening to consider. Perhaps the
bogeyman is us – the public that places the short-term economic
value of the tar sands above the priceless value of our environment
and our health.
—with Faisal Moola
David Suzuki’is a scientist and broadcaster in Vancouver.
Get on and do something about environment
Kelowna Capital News - April 06, 2008
To the editor:
I have read several letters to the editor, including G. Baudais’
telling other readers that climate change is still a disputed topic.
Leaving this aside I think it is time for us to move on and realize
that climate change is not the issue, environmental change, however,
Our reliance on fossil fuels, overtaxing our water resources and our
insatiable consumption of the landscape are the issue.
Arguing over whether or not the temperature on this planet is rising
because of humans won’t matter at all when we have no clean air,
water, or arable land on which to grow food.
Give our collective heads a shake and think of how close we actually
are to the tipping point of disrupting the balance of this planet’s
delicate ecology. I know this cannot be disputed.
Global pollution can be cleaned up
Kelowna Capital News - April 06, 2008
To the editor:
In response to Mr. Lovegrove’s letter (While the debate drags on…
April 4 Capital News), while I appreciate him taking the time to
view the video on Global Warming vs Global Governance, his
unsubstantiated comment that it is nothing more than a product of
“conspiracy theorists” is a common reaction to anything, or anyone,
that goes against what is perceived as being the accepted truth. Is
it not possible that what we are told as being the truth is, in
fact, a conspiracy theory in itself? How do we really know what is
The best that we can possibly hope for is to look at all the facts
and information on all sides of the issue before making up our
minds. Then we can make an informed decision and put an effective
plan in place that will solve the problem at hand.
Also, Mr. Lovegrove, like many others, seems to confuse global
warming with global pollution. They are clearly two different
issues. Of course, global pollution is predominantly man-made but,
global warming has very little, or nothing to do with increased CO2
levels caused by man. (Science has shown that human beings are
responsible for less than three per cent of the increase in current
CO2 levels, which have been proven to be at much higher levels
historically, long before the industrial revolution made its
entrance not that so long ago.)
As for global pollution, I am all for the human race “cleaning up
its act.” We overconsume, we waste, we pollute our air, our water,
and our soil with toxic chemicals, we cut down forests, we create
millions of tons of garbage every year.
Again, we must not confuse the two issues otherwise, we aren’t
likely to come up with any effective solutions at all.
Google has facts on global warming
Kelowna Capital News - March 30, 2008
To the editor:
In response to Mr. Parks letter to the editor on global warming
(Climate Change is a Blatant Fact We’re Overdue to do Something
About, March 28 Capital News), I suggest he view the following
documentary entitled Global Warming or Global Goverance:
Some of the facts:
• CO2 does not cause an increase in temperature. It is temperature
increase which causes an increase in CO2.
• Temperature increase is caused by increased solar/cosmic activity
on the sun.
• Humans are responsible for less than three per cent of all CO2
emissions into the atmosphere.
• The increase in temperature causes the oceans to release the
majority of CO2 into the atmosphere.
• The same global warming phenonema is also happening on other
planets therefore, it is not global, it is universal, and obviously
• There is no majority consensus among scientists supporting
man-made global warming. It is far from conclusive.
Climate change is a blatant fact we’re overdue to do something about
Kelowna Capital News Letters - March 28, 2008
To the editor:
Modern scientific statements generally have dozens, even hundreds,
of peer reviewed authors. For example, seldom is a scientific paper
released from, say, the international CERN particle accelerator
without citing hundreds of physicist-authors. Dissenting views are
cited, analyzed and addressed in scientific papers; the reasons for
discounting dissenting scientific views are plainly presented.
Similarly, the work of the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
contains the views of believers and skeptics. Thousands of views
were considered and referenced. The scientific observations were
that a planet relatively high in CO2 creates a warming climate.
Humanity is pumping CO2 into the atmosphere at historic rates. The
planet is warming and sea levels are rising from melting glaciers.
Humanity is destroying both oceanic and land vegetation which
normally captures CO2 and frees oxygen for animals to breath.
The conclusion was that humanity is destroying the planet’s ability
to balance atmospheric CO2 and oxygen; concurrently through the
burning of fossil fuels, we are adding CO2 into the atmosphere at
The result is a detectable rise in both the planet’s temperature and
In the political press, the views of dissenters are often reported
with charts and analysis that are stated without supporting
scientific peer review—attempting to reduce scientific investigation
into conclusions based on who shouts the loudest by blasting the
political press with manufactured arguments.
In contrast, the Climate Change Panel’s observations were not a
matter of a vote that led to the majority saying whatever they want.
Neither were the observations those of a few tyrannical bullies.
Simply stated: Dissenting views were cited, analyzed, peer reviewed
and found wanting.
The panel’s report on climate is not a political statement; it is a
scientific one—even though its conclusion has social consequences.
The planet is actively warming and humans are principle actors in
Never doubt the ability of a small group of concerned
citizens to change the world. In fact, it is the only thing that ever has.
If you have comments, ideas, solutions, concerns or complaints regarding
global warming or any level of your local, B.C., or Canada government, please make a comment by filling out the form below and/or comment directly to the
Regional District of Central Okanagan
Government of B.C.
Government of Canada
If this form does not work please,
View submitted comments here.
Gossip for All
Make a Comment
[ INDEX ALL ] [ Air Quality ] [ Agriculture ] [ Barking Bylaw ] [ BC Election 09 ] [ BC Gov ] [ BC Human Rights ] [ BC Hydro ] [ BC Laws ] [ BC Native Land Claim ] [ BC Rivers ] [ Boating ] [ Building Inspection ] [ Building Laws ] [ Building Laws RDCO ] [ Bullying ] [ Bylaw Enforcement ] [ Canada Post ] [ Canadian Gov. ] [ Carbon Tax ] [ Democracy ] [ Denied Delegates ] [ Dictatorship ] [ Dog Complaints ] [ Drugs ] [ EDC ] [ Food ] [ Garbage Law ] [ Gas Prices ] [ Global Warming ] [ Gov. Spending ] [ Great Ideas ] [ Health Care ] [ Homelessness ] [ ICBC ] [ Inland Port ] [ Legal System ] [ Library ] [ Missing Pets ] [ New Government ] [ Petition to Parl. ] [ Planning ] [ RDCO Agreement ] [ RDCO Policy ] [ RDCO Policy Manual ] [ RDCO Spending ] [ Road Rage ] [ Robin Hood ] [ School Tax ] [ Security ] [ Smoking ] [ Sewer ] [ Suicide ] [ Tasers ] [ Telus Cell ] [ Telus TV ] [ Telus Wireless ] [ Tourism ] [ Tussock Moth ] [ Wage Inequality ] [ Water Board ] [ Western Budworm ] [ Westside T. Station ] [ WFN ] [ Wind Power ] [ Wrong ]
Gossip for All
Read others Comments
[ Air Quality ] [ Agriculture ] [ Barking Bylaw ] [ BC Election 09 ] [ BC Gov. ] [ BC Human Rights ] [ BC Hydro ] [ BC Laws ] [ BC Native Land Claim ] [ BC Rivers ] [ Boating ] [ Building Inspection ] [ Buidling Laws ] [ Building Laws RDCO ] [ Bullying ] [ Bylaw Enforcement ] [ Canada Post ] [ Canadian Gov. ] [ Carbon Tax ] [ Democracy ] [ Denied Delegates ] [ Dictatorship ] [ Dog Complaints ] [ Drugs ] [ EDC ] [ Food ] [ Garbage Laws ] [ Gas Prices ] [ Global Warming ] [ Gov. Spending ] [ Great Ideas ] [ Health Care ] [ Homelessness ] [ ICBC ] [ Inland Port ] [ Legal System ] [ Missing Pets ] [ New Government ] [ Petition to Parl. ] [ Planning Minutes ] [ RDCO Agreement ] [ RDCO Policy ] [ RDCO Policy Manual ] [ Road Rage ] [ RDCO Spending ] [ Robin Hood ] [ School Tax ] [ Secure Prosperity ] [ Sewer ] [ Smoking ] [ Suicide ] [ Tasers ] [ Telus Cell ] [ Telus TV ] [ Telus Wireless ] [ Tourism ] [ Tussock Moth ] [ Wage Inequality ] [ Water Board ] [ Western Budworm ] [ Westside T. Station ] [ WFN ] [ Wind Power ] [ Wrong ]
In Other Towns
[ INDEX ALL ] [ Boucherie Rd ] [ Kaleden ] [ Kelowna ] [ Naramata ] [ Oyama ] [ Peachland ] [ Penticton ] [ Summerland ] [ Vernon ] [ West Kelowna ] [ Westside Road ] [ Winfield ]
[ Boucherie Road ] [ Kaleden ] [ Kelowna ] [ Naramata ] [ Oyama ] [ Peachland ] [ Pentiction ] [ Summerland ] [ Vernon ] [ West Kelowna ] [ Westside Road ] [ Winfield ]
On okanaganlakebc.ca you will find
local Okanagan BC businesses, services, classifieds, local arts and crafts,
lakefront vacation rentals, plus much more
located near and around Okanagan Lake. We will be adding to this site, so come back and
check it often.