« December 2010 | Main | February 2011 »
Please read: Important Notice and Disclaimer
From The Financial Post
Demarketing is reducing or shifting demand. This tactic has been used against Canadian forest products and more recently, Alberta oil. But the Canadian export that’s been hardest hit is farmed salmon.
As in the case of Alberta oil, a large number of the organizations that campaign against farmed salmon are funded by a single, American foundation: the Packard foundation.
To continue reading, please click here.
Please read: Important Notice and Disclaimer
Between May of 2002 and the spring of 2010, the David Suzuki Foundation distributed a brochure titled, "Why You Shouldn't Eat Farmed Salmon." This brochure was produced as part of the Pacific Salmon Forests project.
According to U.S. tax returns, between 2000 and 2003, U.S. foundations paid $US 2.8 million to the David Suzuki Foundation for the Pacific Salmon Forests project, including:
As it appears, the $US 762,600 from the David and Lucile Packard Foundation was provided as part of the Marine Fisheries program. This program has a strategy titled Market Intervention Tools to Conserve Marine Fisheries. Was the David Suzuki Foundation's brochure, Why You Shouldn't Eat Farmed Salmon, one of the Market Intervention tools paid for by the David and Lucile Packard Foundation, based in California?
Over roughly the same period that the Goldman Fund granted $180,000 to the David Suzuki Foundation, the Goldman Fund also paid $60,000 to the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy (I.A.T.P.) based in Minneapolis, Minnesota for a project titled, "Ending Industrial Aquaculture." The I.A.T.P. co-ordinates the "Go Wild" campaign for which the stated purpose is "to break the cheap farmed fish habit… so that wild fish will be more widely distributed."
The Salmon Shopper's Guide produced by the I.A.T.P. refers readers to the David Suzuki Foundation for on-line information on "the perils of feedlot salmon farming." Another Salmon Shopper's Guide produced as part of the Go Wild campaign refers the public to SeaWeb (Seafood Choices), the Farmed and Dangerous campaign, and the Marine Stewardship Council. The guides say, "There are two choices of salmon: wild and farmed." These guides make no mention at all of Alaska's ocean-ranching or Alaskan ranched salmon - which accounts for about one third of so-called Alaskan "wild" salmon.
Several Alaskan salmon suppliers provide links to the web-sites of the David Suzuki Foundation and the Coastal Alliance for Aquaculture Reform. For example, Rose Fisheries.
In 2009, a U.S. foundation paid $30,000 to Tides USA/Tides Canada "To expand an outreach campaign to mobilize urban voters for a federal ban on coastal tankers." After this was mentioned in testimony to a House of Commons committee on Energy Security in Canada, and in an op-ed published in the Financial Post, (Demarketing Alberta) the U.S. foundation quietly RE-WROTE this grant. For the re-written version of this grant, click here.
The original version, is shown below:
For the full story by Joel McKay in Business in Vancouver, please click here. Special thanks to Business in Vancouver for granting permission to post this article.
Please read: Copyright Notice & Disclaimer.
Please read: Copyright Notice & Disclaimer
U.S. tax returns show that in 2006 and 2007, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund Inc. paid $200,000 to the West Coast Environmental Law Research Foundation and to the Pembina Institute "to prevent the development of a pipeline and tanker port ..." on the B.C. coast.
According to U.S. tax returns for the Rockefeller Brothers Fund Inc., in 2006, 2007 and 2008, RBF Inc. had small amounts of "partnership income" from several pipeline companies, as shown below.
In January of 2011, I asked the Rockefeller Brothers Fund Inc. (RBF) about these investments and was told by e-mail by RBF that they would get back to me by about January 26, 2011. Unfortunately, though, I didn't hear back from them about this.
"The price of greatness is responsibility."
- Winston Churchill.
American foundations really can change the world.
To continue reading, please click here.
Please read: Copyright Notice & Disclaimer.
Please read: Copyright Notice & Disclaimer
Updated Feb. 2, 2011.
According to U.S. tax returns for 2008 and 2009, Tides Canada Foundation paid $90,125 to the Georgia Straight Alliance for Organizing for Change. According to e-mail from Organizing for Change, this project seeks to influence the leadership picks of both the Liberal and the NDP parties in British Columbia. As such, its fair to inquire about the origins of the funding that Tides Canada is providing for this project. This is relevant and important in light of the $57 million that Tides Canada has been paid by USA foundations, since 2000.
Since January 12, 2011, Tides Canada has been asked by e-mail about the origins of the $90,125 that Tides Canada paid to the Georgia Straight Alliance for Organizing for Change. So far, no reply.
Fair questions also seem to be in order about the support that Organizing for Change may be getting indirectly through American organizations. For example, the web-site for Organizing for Change is run by Groundwire, a Seattle-based organization that is heavily funded by USA foundations.
Groundwire has been paid $975,000 (2000 - 2010) from the Brainerd Foundation, $355,000 (2008 - 2010) from the Wilburforce Foundation and $65,000 from the Bullitt Foundation (2008 - 2010). These are some of the same USA foundations that are funding B.C. environmental organizations that campaign against the Northern Gateway Enbridge pipeline and against oil tanker traffic that would allow the export of Canadian oil to Asia.
During 2009 and 2010 the Brainerd Foundation paid $18,000 to the Dogwood Initiative including funds "To help grow public opposition to counter the Enbridge pipeline construction and the risk associated with increased oil tanker traffic in B.C.'s north." The Brainerd Foundation also paid $2,000 to the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society "To leverage the moratorium by First Nations on oil and gas development on their lands..." The amount of this grant is small but the stated purpose is telling.
One of the grants from the Bullitt Foundation was $30,000 paid to Tides USA "to mobilize urban voters for a federal ban on coastal tankers." Shortly after this was reported in testimony to a House of Commons committee, and in an op-ed in The Financial Post (Demarketing Alberta), the Bullitt Foundation RE-WROTE this grant to Tides USA. The Bullitt Foundation also paid Tides USA $30,000 "to strengthen and enforce a 34-year moratorium on oil tanker traffic in the mid and north coast of British Columbia, and to prevent expansion of oil and gas infrastructure in Georgia Strait and the lower Fraser Basin," through the Dogwood Initiative which runs the NO TANKERS campaign.
According to its own web-site, the Wilburforce Foundation paid:
In summary, what the above information suggests to me is that Groundwire, which runs the Organizing for Change web-site, is heavily funded by USA foundations with a clear agenda to thwart the oil and gas industry in British Columbia, and oil tanker traffic which would allow exports of Canadian oil to Asia.
When Organizing for Change tries to influence the leadership picks of the Liberal and the NDP parties, will it seek candidates who would serve the interests of the American foundations that are funding the organizations that support Organizing for Change?
Please read: Copyright Notice & Disclaimer
On the surface, this is about whether Endswell may have had conflicting or competing interests related to its investments in gas and oil companies some ten years ago. More broadly, the question is about the origins of the money that is being spent on environmental and perhaps on political campaigns, in the name of the Endswell Foundation and Tides Canada.
Since 1997, the Endswell Foundation has paid $12 million to Tides Canada, U.S. tax returns show. Since 2003, fully 99 percent of Endswell's grants have gone to Tides Canada.
U.S. tax returns for 1997, 1998, and 1999 (excerpts shown below) say that at the time, the Endswell Foundation had corporate bonds in about 20 companies. Of those, three companies were gas companies: Consumer Gas Ltd., B.C. Gas and Nova Gas Transmission which is a wholly-owned subsidiary of TransCanada Pipelines Ltd. In addition, Endswell had investments in Trans Quebec Maritimes which may have been a subsidiary of Trans Canada Pipelines which owns the Keystone pipeline from Alberta to the USA. That pipeline started operations in June of 2010.
Environmental organizations oppose both the Enbridge and the Keystone pipeline. The campaign against the Enbridge pipeline seems to be more intense. U.S. foundations have made grants specifically for environmental groups to oppose the Enbridge pipeline.
In the U.S. tax returns from 2000 onwards, Endswell reports corporate stocks but corporate bonds are not reported. Since 2000, Endswell's corporate stocks have been with Genus and Real Assets which, if I'm not mistaken, is at VanCity.
The president of the Endswell Foundation has been asked (by e-mail and letter) whether Endswell continued to have investments in gas companies after 2000. So far, no response has been received.
For a larger version of the excerpts of U.S. tax returns below, please click on the image itself.
