Greenpeace and those like the Sea Shepherds.

In 1971, a group of peaceful protesters officially organized and formed what is known as "Greenpeace", an organization put together in order to protect animals, and land and marine habitats and environments.

Their very statement on their website says it all:
"
Our core values are reflected in our environmental campaign work: We 'bear witness' to environmental destruction in a peaceful, non-violent manner. We use non-violent confrontation to raise the level and quality of public debate. In exposing threats to the environment and finding solutions we have no permanent allies or adversaries. We ensure our financial independence from political or commercial interests. We seek solutions to environmental dilemmas and promote open, informed debate about society's environmental choices. "

http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/en/about/


Through peaceful protests, fundraising, campaigning, and various public events, Greenpeace manages to save thousands of animals, restoration of forest, other terrestrial, and marine habitats, and addressing problems as vast as global warming. They built themselves into an internationally recognized organization with offices worldwide.

Why do they do this? Because they care. They believe that while you need to care, you must act on it as well. But don't bomb, plot against people, declare war, or fight. Peacefully, logically, and rationally go out, gather supporters, and raise awareness. If you can do this then you can raise enough support to eventually change something.

While it is an ideal process, some people believe it takes too long to peacefully change the world. One example is Paul Watson, a former member and founder of Greenpeace, who left on his own to form an organization known as The Sea Shepherds.

http://www.seashepherd.org/whales/whale-wars.html

This group goes out to the Antarctic and directly fights whaling fleets with chemicals and other bombardments in order to achieve their goal of stopping over whaling and fishing in the southern Ocean. They believe this type of action is the only way to truly change outcomes and to protect these beings. While they now have a television series on Animal Planet, their true goal is to put an end to illegal whaling.

So, which is better? The peaceful protesting of activists world wide, or the small group of ragtag teammates who go out and aggressively defend the defenseless?

Both have their selling points and both get somethings done. While the Sea Shepherds are on the front battle lines, I believe that Greenpeace is the most successful in the long run. Unfortunately, the Sea shepherds have not seen  a  lot of progress on protecting these whales, while Greenpeace has seen a lot of progress in changing views, protecting species, and actively restoring numerous environments that were in extreme danger as well as raise vast support and awareness for numerous topics and issues.


Peaceful may be better for the long haul, but the aggressive is more entertaining for TV.

Kellen F.

Earth Day as a Social Movement

In the beginning of this school year I met with Denis Hayes, the founder of Earth Day as well as the CEO of the Bulitt Foundation. According to him, his wikipedia profile is fairly accurate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denis_Hayes

This "holiday" started in 1970 with just the United States. And, in 1990, Denis Hayes took this event international. Today over 175 countries celebrate it each year.

The entire day is devoted to raising awareness about the facts of earth and its fragility and the desperate need for change from all people. Different organizations spread the messages of Earth Day by spouting facts of population numbers, resource use numbers, and various activities world wide in order to raise awareness.

Some people claim it is just another day, it makes no difference, and it has no real impact on the environment other than just a day set aside. I believe that Earth Day can be seen as a social movement for the environment in many ways. Although it happens just once a year, it encourages schools, both college level and below, students, businesses, and all other organizations to get involved. Many campuses hold events specifically to raise awareness for Earth day. The events themselves are held on April 22 each year, however, the message remains for every day after that. Earth day successfully recruits new members to the Earth Day Network each year.

Denis Hayes adamantly speaks about the amazing impact he feels this Day of Awareness has had on the world. There are global conversation days between communities and nations geared specifically at achieving higher sustainability world wide. He never thought his idea would carry out this far, being past its 40th anniversary, and that it would reach so many people internationally. Now that it has though, he hopes to continue to feed it until every country in the world recognizes it and helps to raise awareness for the Earth.

He says that the Earth is in trouble. It will never change that people want to improve their quality of life as much as they can. So the question is then how do we do this why ensuring the maintenance of Earth's resources for the rest of future generations. And, environmental policies will unfortunately but most assuredly be driven by politics and the best way to ensure that these policies are in the benefit of both people and the Earth is to get more people involved in the sustainability movement. One way to do this is to help push Earth Day farther and to the best awareness day it can be.

Change is happening whether we like it or not. So, we need to make sure that it is for the better. Earth Day helps raise awareness but can only go so far without people behind it pushing it forward.  So we must always consider the future net value of resources and not just what we have today.

-Kellen F.

How Environmental NGOs have changed

     An NGO, or non-governmental organization, is one that can exist on local, national, and international levels. The environmental NGOs can all range in their political views, and all have different agendas in changing the environmental policy in the United States. Ranging from large national groups to smaller local groups with local concerns, many groups today focus on the old U.S. conservation movement, (National Geographic Society, Audubon Society) all American organizations with worldwide influence.

     Overall the scope of the NGO movements has been progressing since the early 19th century. In this period, many were focused on the conservation movement, which included fisheries and wildlife management, water, soil conservation, and sustainable forestry. This conservation movement has prolonged its existence and continues still today, including sustainable yield of limited natural resources, biodiversity and preservation of wilderness. The modern environmental movement, beginning from the 1960s was primarily concerned with issues of pollution, and over time has become broader in scope to include all human activity and how it affects the landscape.  

     Starting from the Progressive era between the 1890s-1920s, urban environmental health reforms included obtaining a clean water supply, more efficient removal of raw sewage, and reduction in crowded unsanitary living conditions. Today, the health reforms have moved more towards the physical well being of the human body. Such concerns have to do with nutrition, preventative medicines, and aging. 

     All in all these movements encompass the main idea of the sustainability movements, in that it is important to recognize how anthropogenesis will in turn affect the Earth's landscape. Started in 1980 and mainly focusing on the Gaia theory, the sustainability movements focus on the value of the Earth and its interrelations with humans and human interaction. The most important message to take away, if anything, is that humans are affecting the Earth more than they know, or would like to admit. In any case, it is extremely important to be aware of the decisions that are made, and how they will in turn affect us in the future. Whether or not you join an NGO is not relevant, people can make a huge difference simply by changing their own habits first.

-Daniel L.

The Appiko Movement

     Inspired by the Chipko Movement, the Appiko Chalewali movement was started in the Uttar Kannada region of Kamataka. In November 1983, the commercial felling of trees for timber extraction caused much disturbance in the surrounding communities. The destruction of the natural forest resulted in soil erosion and caused much of their water resources to be dried up. In the Saklani village of Sirsi, the people were prohibited to the natural resources, restricted from gathering timber, dried branches, and non timber forest products used for the purpose of fuelwood, fodder, etc. Essentially the people were denied their right to their land and its resources.

     In September 1983, a few women decided to begin a movement similar to that of the Chipko movement, but in South India. Many women gathered together from all different villages, walked five miles to the nearby forest, and hugged the trees, not allowing the contractors to cut them down. Frustration grew and negotiation drew on for 38 days before the contractors were finally forced to withdraw and stop felling the trees in the forest. While this did initially stop the government from further destroying the forest, they eventually picked up where they left off and continued to cut down the forest. As a result, a stronger wave of the movement came again, and it was backed by all the local people. Even the daily laborers hired by the contractors ceased to do their work.

     In October, the movement went into the second phase, spreading on to the Bengaon forest. Here, the forest was a mix of tropical and evergreen, mostly on hilly terrain. The indigenous peoples that lived in this forest thrived and depended on their surroundings for livelihood. Due to the commercial felling of the forest, bamboo began to disappear in the ecology of this population. This was detrimental to the surrounding societies because they used bamboo to weave baskets and mats; things that were used and sold in everyday life. Once again the peoples in the region hugged the trees, thus forcing the contractors to abandon the felling of trees. 

     It did not take long before this movement caught on and people began to realize that they have the ability to make changes and protect the world around them. The Appiko movement became a symbol of people's power for their rights to natural resources. The victories won in these movements showed that the people not only successfully protected their forests, they also took steps to regenerating the trees in already felled areas, and continued to utilize the resources with proper consideration to conservation. 

-Daniel L.

The Garden

     In our lecture today, we watched a documentary entitled The Garden. The beauty of the plants and community was rich and inspiring. Social movements like this one are important to pay attention to- because of their importance and magnitude.

     The fourteen-acre community garden at 41st and Alameda in South Central Los Angeles is the largest of its kind in the United States. Started as a form of healing after the devastating L.A. riots in 1992, the South Central Farmers have since created a miracle in one of the country’s most blighted neighborhoods.

     It was very interesting to me to witness the clash of chemical-free, indigenous-style gardening with the political system of the United States, mostly run by white, rich, upper-class men.  More interesting, however, was the select few fighting against the farmers who were not white men at all... the two main antagonized "characters" were women... one African American, and one Latino.

     It was difficult for me to separate myself, as someone who has been raised in a system of order and laws, from the antagonized government and private property owner (Horowitz).  As much as I wanted to empathize with the farmers (for their garden is no doubt strong and beautiful and important) it was difficult for me to get past the fact that the land was, in fact, privately owned.  I sighed with relief when they finally found a reason for fighting the eviction (that the land was suspiciously and privately sold to Horowitz by the city).

   Overall, I enjoyed the film and the the popular belief that the farmers fought against.... "If everyone told you nothing more could be done, would you give up?"


-Alice S.