The People's Record

An ongoing chronicle of communities of resistance around the world: anti-racism, anti-zionism, anti-imperialism, the Arab Spring, anti-austerity protests in Greece and across Europe, student movements all around the world, the Occupy Movement, anti-capitalist movements, anarchist movements, socialist movements, leftist communities and other relevant international news.

photo

Mexico: Ground Zero in the fight against Monsanto for the future of maizeMay 13, 2013 In the 2011 action-thriller “Unknown”, scientists are persecuted by the biotech industry because they plan the open release of a drought- and pest-resistant strain of maize that could help eradicate world hunger. There are certain parallels with the situation today in Mexico, the birthplace of maize, which is at the centre of the global fight to protect the crop’s diversity from the onslaught of genetically modified varieties. “It’s the first time in history that one of the most important harvests in the world is threatened in its centre of diversity,” Pat Mooney, the head of the Action Group on Erosion, Technology and Concentration (ETC Group), an international NGO, told IPS. “If we let the companies win, there will be no chance to defend them in other parts. What is happening here is of key importance for the rest of the world.” Civil society organisations are raising their guard against the possibility that the government of conservative President Enrique Peña Nieto of the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) may approve commercial cultivation of transgenic maize, a move widely condemned by environmentalists and other activists, academics, and small and medium producers due to the risks it poses. In September, the U.S. corporations Monsanto, Pioneer and Dow Agrosciences presented six applications for commercial plantations of transgenic maize on more than two million hectares in the northwestern state of Sinaloa and the northeastern state of Tamaulipas. Moreover, in January these companies and Syngenta presented 11 applications for pilot and experimental plots to grow transgenic corn on 622 hectares in the northern states of Chihuahua, Coahuila, Durango, Sinaloa and Baja California. And Monsanto has applied for an additional plantation in an unspecified area in the north of the country. Since 2009, the Mexican government has issued 177 permits for experimental plots of transgenic maize covering an area of 2,664 hectares, according to the latest figures provided by the authorities. But large-scale commercial release of GM maize has not yet been authorised. “They are going to serve up transgenic maize on every table in spite of the fact that food sovereignty depends on growing native corn,” said Evangelina Robles, a member of Red en Defensa del Maíz (Maize Defence Network) which campaigns against GM corn. “As a result, we have to demand its prohibition by the state,” she told IPS. Mexico produces 22 million tonnes of maize a year, and imports 10 million tonnes, according to the agriculture ministry. The country purchased about two million tonnes of GM maize from South Africa over the last two years, and is set to import another 150,000 tonnes. Three million maize farmers cultivate about eight million hectares in Mexico, two million of which are devoted to family farming. White maize is the main crop for human consumption, while yellow maize, for animal feed, is largely imported. The National Council for the Evaluation of Social Policy (CONEVAL) estimates the country’s annual consumption of maize at 123 kg per person, compared to a world average of 16.8 kg. The historical link with pre-Columbian indigenous cultures gives maize a strong symbolic and cultural significance throughout Mesoamerica, the area comprising southern Mexico and Central America, where it was domesticated, producing 59 landraces or native strains and 209 varieties. In the state of Mexico, adjacent to the capital city’s Federal District, small farmers have found their native maize to be contaminated with GM maize, according to tests carried out by students at the state Autonomous Metropolitan University. “We swapped seeds and decided to do some tests. Now we are more careful when exchanging, and over who participates in the fair, although we still have to carry out confirmation tests,” activist Sara López, of the Red Origen Volcanes (Volcanoes Origins Network), an association of small farmers that has been organising producers’ fairs since 2010, told IPS. Environmental, scientific and small farmers’ organisations have discovered GM contamination of native maize in Chihuahua, Hidalgo, Puebla and Oaxaca. Contamination is “a carefully and perversely planned strategy,” according to Camila Montecinos, from the Chile office of GRAIN, an international NGO that works to support small farmers and social movements in their struggles for community-controlled and biodiversity-based food systems. Transnational food companies “chose maize, soy and canola because of their enormous potential for contamination (by wind-pollination),” said Montecinos, one of the experts participating in the preliminary hearing on transgenic contamination of native maize at the Permanent Peoples’ Tribunal, an international opinion tribunal which opened its Mexican chapter in 2012 and will conclude with a non-binding ruling in 2014. “When contamination spreads, the companies claim that the presence of transgenic crops must be recognised and legalised,” in order to pave the way for marketing the GM seeds, to which they own the patents, she said. Mexico’s environment minister, Juan Guerra, has said that all available scientific information will be examined before a decision is made. But that will not be easy. The National Confederation of Campesinos (Small Farmers), one of the main internal movements in the ruling PRI, has had an agreement with Monsanto since 2007 under which the company is to “conserve” native varieties. Meanwhile, the Peña Nieto government still has not approved regulations for the format and contents of reports on the results of releasing GM organisms, and the possible threats to the environment, biodiversity, and the health of animals, plants and fish. “For 18 years, corporations have been unsuccessful in convincing the people that their products are good. Maize is being used as a means of political and economic control. People need maize to be alive,” the ETC Group’s Mooney said. The transgenic seeds on the market are herbicide-resistant Roundup Ready and Bt (for the Bacillus thuringiensis gene they carry for pest resistance) versions of cotton, maize, soy and canola. While they are legally grown in Canada, the United States, Argentina, Brazil and Spain, they are banned for example in China, Russia and the majority of the EU countries. Recent studies published in the United States show that transgenic crops do not significantly increase yield per hectare, do not reduce herbicide use, and do not increase resistance to pests, in contrast to biotech industry claims. “We are analysing what legal action to take against the new applications (to plant GM maize),” said Robles, of the Maize Defence Network. SourcePhoto   Monsanto KILLS.

Mexico: Ground Zero in the fight against Monsanto for the future of maize
May 13, 2013

In the 2011 action-thriller “Unknown”, scientists are persecuted by the biotech industry because they plan the open release of a drought- and pest-resistant strain of maize that could help eradicate world hunger.

There are certain parallels with the situation today in Mexico, the birthplace of maize, which is at the centre of the global fight to protect the crop’s diversity from the onslaught of genetically modified varieties.

“It’s the first time in history that one of the most important harvests in the world is threatened in its centre of diversity,” Pat Mooney, the head of the Action Group on Erosion, Technology and Concentration (ETC Group), an international NGO, told IPS.

“If we let the companies win, there will be no chance to defend them in other parts. What is happening here is of key importance for the rest of the world.”

Civil society organisations are raising their guard against the possibility that the government of conservative President Enrique Peña Nieto of the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) may approve commercial cultivation of transgenic maize, a move widely condemned by environmentalists and other activists, academics, and small and medium producers due to the risks it poses.

In September, the U.S. corporations Monsanto, Pioneer and Dow Agrosciences presented six applications for commercial plantations of transgenic maize on more than two million hectares in the northwestern state of Sinaloa and the northeastern state of Tamaulipas.

Moreover, in January these companies and Syngenta presented 11 applications for pilot and experimental plots to grow transgenic corn on 622 hectares in the northern states of Chihuahua, Coahuila, Durango, Sinaloa and Baja California. And Monsanto has applied for an additional plantation in an unspecified area in the north of the country.

Since 2009, the Mexican government has issued 177 permits for experimental plots of transgenic maize covering an area of 2,664 hectares, according to the latest figures provided by the authorities.

But large-scale commercial release of GM maize has not yet been authorised.

“They are going to serve up transgenic maize on every table in spite of the fact that food sovereignty depends on growing native corn,” said Evangelina Robles, a member of Red en Defensa del Maíz (Maize Defence Network) which campaigns against GM corn. “As a result, we have to demand its prohibition by the state,” she told IPS.

Mexico produces 22 million tonnes of maize a year, and imports 10 million tonnes, according to the agriculture ministry. The country purchased about two million tonnes of GM maize from South Africa over the last two years, and is set to import another 150,000 tonnes.

Three million maize farmers cultivate about eight million hectares in Mexico, two million of which are devoted to family farming. White maize is the main crop for human consumption, while yellow maize, for animal feed, is largely imported.

The National Council for the Evaluation of Social Policy (CONEVAL) estimates the country’s annual consumption of maize at 123 kg per person, compared to a world average of 16.8 kg.

The historical link with pre-Columbian indigenous cultures gives maize a strong symbolic and cultural significance throughout Mesoamerica, the area comprising southern Mexico and Central America, where it was domesticated, producing 59 landraces or native strains and 209 varieties.

In the state of Mexico, adjacent to the capital city’s Federal District, small farmers have found their native maize to be contaminated with GM maize, according to tests carried out by students at the state Autonomous Metropolitan University.

“We swapped seeds and decided to do some tests. Now we are more careful when exchanging, and over who participates in the fair, although we still have to carry out confirmation tests,” activist Sara López, of the Red Origen Volcanes (Volcanoes Origins Network), an association of small farmers that has been organising producers’ fairs since 2010, told IPS.

Environmental, scientific and small farmers’ organisations have discovered GM contamination of native maize in Chihuahua, Hidalgo, Puebla and Oaxaca.

Contamination is “a carefully and perversely planned strategy,” according to Camila Montecinos, from the Chile office of GRAIN, an international NGO that works to support small farmers and social movements in their struggles for community-controlled and biodiversity-based food systems.

Transnational food companies “chose maize, soy and canola because of their enormous potential for contamination (by wind-pollination),” said Montecinos, one of the experts participating in the preliminary hearing on transgenic contamination of native maize at the Permanent Peoples’ Tribunal, an international opinion tribunal which opened its Mexican chapter in 2012 and will conclude with a non-binding ruling in 2014.

“When contamination spreads, the companies claim that the presence of transgenic crops must be recognised and legalised,” in order to pave the way for marketing the GM seeds, to which they own the patents, she said.

Mexico’s environment minister, Juan Guerra, has said that all available scientific information will be examined before a decision is made.

But that will not be easy. The National Confederation of Campesinos (Small Farmers), one of the main internal movements in the ruling PRI, has had an agreement with Monsanto since 2007 under which the company is to “conserve” native varieties.

Meanwhile, the Peña Nieto government still has not approved regulations for the format and contents of reports on the results of releasing GM organisms, and the possible threats to the environment, biodiversity, and the health of animals, plants and fish.

“For 18 years, corporations have been unsuccessful in convincing the people that their products are good. Maize is being used as a means of political and economic control. People need maize to be alive,” the ETC Group’s Mooney said.

The transgenic seeds on the market are herbicide-resistant Roundup Ready and Bt (for the Bacillus thuringiensis gene they carry for pest resistance) versions of cotton, maize, soy and canola. While they are legally grown in Canada, the United States, Argentina, Brazil and Spain, they are banned for example in China, Russia and the majority of the EU countries.

Recent studies published in the United States show that transgenic crops do not significantly increase yield per hectare, do not reduce herbicide use, and do not increase resistance to pests, in contrast to biotech industry claims.

“We are analysing what legal action to take against the new applications (to plant GM maize),” said Robles, of the Maize Defence Network.

Source
Photo
 
Monsanto KILLS.

photo

Navajo Nation battles uranium corporations, nuclear industryMay 10, 2013 Since European settlers first arrived on this continent, they set out to accumulate as much wealth and land as humanly possible. Their reign of terror on the indigenous populations —destructive of land, culture and entire communities—was the basis for immense fortunes that spurred the global economy and advancing capitalism. This struggle, now over 500 years in the making, is ongoing on many fronts, including the Navajo Nation’s current battle over U.S. companies’ uranium extraction. In early 2013, uranium companies approached the Navajo Nation in hopes they will allow them to renew mining operations on their land. These companies claim that they have developed newer and safer methods for extracting uranium, after decades of environmental destruction and abuse led the Navajo Nation to officially ban their mining. This decades-long battle for environmental justice is part and parcel of the struggles for workers’ rights and Native self-determination, and against the forces of militarism and capitalism. Exploitation of Navajo lands The Navajo Nation sits on 27,425 square miles in the four corners area of the southwestern United States. The area holds a vast amount of uranium ore and thus has become a center in the struggle over nuclear energy and weaponry. Since the end of World War II, and the onset of the so-called Cold War, the U.S. government began mining uranium domestically in order to not rely on foreign supplies. Uranium is one of the most common naturally occurring radioactive metals on the planet, and was understood as essential for the development of nuclear weapons and technology. Due to the unique geology and consistent climate of the Southwest, mining companies saw the Navajo reservation as the most profitable site to open mining operations in the 1940s. In 1948, the United States Atomic Energy Commission declared it would be the sole purchaser of all uranium mined in the country, initiating a mining boom of private companies and contractors who knew they had a guaranteed buyer. Of the thousands of uranium mines, 92% were located in the Colorado Plateau on which the Navajo Nation is located. Between 1944 and 1986 approximately 4 million tons of uranium ore was mined from Navajo Tribal land. In the early days of mining, Navajo people flocked to the low-wage work given the scarcity of jobs around the reservation. The Navajo workers dealt with racist bosses and coworkers while going into the most dangerous and undesirable jobs at lesser pay. Nonetheless, after Navajo Code Talkers’ had famously contributed to U.S. forces in World War II, many Navajo workers believed they had a patriotic duty and responsibility to the United States. Mineworkers were also lied to about the dangers of Radon poisoning. Full article

Navajo Nation battles uranium corporations, nuclear industry
May 10, 2013

Since European settlers first arrived on this continent, they set out to accumulate as much wealth and land as humanly possible. Their reign of terror on the indigenous populations —destructive of land, culture and entire communities—was the basis for immense fortunes that spurred the global economy and advancing capitalism.

This struggle, now over 500 years in the making, is ongoing on many fronts, including the Navajo Nation’s current battle over U.S. companies’ uranium extraction.

In early 2013, uranium companies approached the Navajo Nation in hopes they will allow them to renew mining operations on their land. These companies claim that they have developed newer and safer methods for extracting uranium, after decades of environmental destruction and abuse led the Navajo Nation to officially ban their mining.

This decades-long battle for environmental justice is part and parcel of the struggles for workers’ rights and Native self-determination, and against the forces of militarism and capitalism.

Exploitation of Navajo lands

The Navajo Nation sits on 27,425 square miles in the four corners area of the southwestern United States. The area holds a vast amount of uranium ore and thus has become a center in the struggle over nuclear energy and weaponry.

Since the end of World War II, and the onset of the so-called Cold War, the U.S. government began mining uranium domestically in order to not rely on foreign supplies. Uranium is one of the most common naturally occurring radioactive metals on the planet, and was understood as essential for the development of nuclear weapons and technology.

Due to the unique geology and consistent climate of the Southwest, mining companies saw the Navajo reservation as the most profitable site to open mining operations in the 1940s. In 1948, the United States Atomic Energy Commission declared it would be the sole purchaser of all uranium mined in the country, initiating a mining boom of private companies and contractors who knew they had a guaranteed buyer.

Of the thousands of uranium mines, 92% were located in the Colorado Plateau on which the Navajo Nation is located. Between 1944 and 1986 approximately 4 million tons of uranium ore was mined from Navajo Tribal land.

In the early days of mining, Navajo people flocked to the low-wage work given the scarcity of jobs around the reservation. The Navajo workers dealt with racist bosses and coworkers while going into the most dangerous and undesirable jobs at lesser pay. Nonetheless, after Navajo Code Talkers’ had famously contributed to U.S. forces in World War II, many Navajo workers believed they had a patriotic duty and responsibility to the United States.

Mineworkers were also lied to about the dangers of Radon poisoning.

Full article

photos

US law says no ‘oil’ spilled in Arkansas, exempting Exxon from cleanup dues
April 3, 2013

The central Arkansas spill caused by Exxon’s aging Pegasus pipeline has reportedly unleashed 10,000 barrels of Canadian heavy crude - but a technicality says it’s not oil, letting the energy giant off the hook from paying into a national cleanup fund.

At least legally speaking, diluted bitumen like the heavy crude that’s overrun Mayflower, Arkansas is not classified as ‘oil.’ While the distinction might normally not mean much, in the case of the disastrous spill in Arkansas it ensures that ExxonMobil will not have to pay into the federal Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund.

According to ThinkProgress, which has brought attention on the strange legal exemption, ExxonMobil has already confirmed that the compromised pipeline was transporting “low-quality Wabasca Heavy crude” from Canada’s Alberta region. That particular form of crude must be diluted with lighter fluids to evenly flow through a pipeline - it also contains large quantities of bitumen (commonly known as asphalt).

The end result is that both the US Congress and the Internal Revenue Service do not consider tar sand oil as oil at all, and thus exempt any company transporting the crude from paying an $0.08-per-barrel tax - which is the primary source of cash for the federal government’s oil spill cleanup fund.

The strange exemption of heavy bitumen crude from classification as oil dates back to a time when the extraction of tar sands on a large scale was thought improbable with then-contemporary technology. However, as oil companies developed the means to develop Canadian tar sands into a booming energy sector, the legal definition of oil has remained the same.

Funds from that same fund have already helped to clean up another spill caused by a ruptured pipeline. In 2010, more than 1 million barrels of diluted bitumen (crude oil) were spilled into the Kalamazoo River. To make matters worse, unlike conventional crude oil, bitumen heavy crude sinks. The ensuing environmental impact has made that Michigan spill the most expensive in US history, as toxic substances seeped into the surrounding soil.

There is also the fear that bitumen heavy crude could be more corrosive to pipelines than conventional crude. Lorne Stockman, research director at Oil Change International, told ThinkProgress that it’s past time for the law to be changed:

“The question is why we should continue this exemption given that it’s clear tar sands oil is more likely to spill because it’s more corrosive… and more and more tar sands is coming into the US.”

For its part the oil industry disputes the claim, and has produced scientific impact research that does not reflect higher corrosion by transporting bitumen heavy crude.

Judge Allen Dodson of Arkansas’ Faulkner County seemed to reflect the concerns of those impacted by the latest spill of heavy bitumen crude, saying: “Crude oil is crude oil. None of it is real good to touch.”

Source
Photo 1, 2

As the Obama administration deliberates on the Keystone XL, two spills happened in the past week: this one in Arkansas & another in Minnesota, where 15,000 gallons of tar sands spilled from a derailed train. 

photos

Fracking spurrs biggest earthquakes yet
March 29, 2013

A new study in the journal Geology is the latest to tie a string of unusual earthquakes, in this case, in central Oklahoma, to the injection of wastewater deep underground. Researchers now say that the magnitude 5.7 earthquake near Prague, Okla., on Nov. 6, 2011, may also be the largest ever linked to wastewater injection. Felt as far away as Milwaukee, more than 800 miles away, the quake — the biggest ever recorded in Oklahoma—destroyed 14 homes, buckled a federal highway and left two people injured. Small earthquakes continue to be recorded in the area.

The recent boom in U.S. energy production has produced massive amounts of wastewater. The water is used both in hydrofracking, which cracks open rocks to release natural gas, and in coaxing petroleum out of conventional oil wells. In both cases, the brine and chemical-laced water has to be disposed of, often by injecting it back underground elsewhere, where it has the potential to trigger earthquakes. The water linked to the Prague quakes was a byproduct of oil extraction at one set of oil wells, and was pumped into another set of depleted oil wells targeted for waste storage.

Scientists have linked a rising number of quakes in normally calm parts of Arkansas, Texas, Ohio and Colorado to below-ground injection. In the last four years, the number of quakes in the middle of the United States jumped 11-fold from the three decades prior, the authors of the Geology study estimate. Last year, a group at the U.S. Geological Survey also attributed a remarkable rise in small- to mid-size quakes in the region to humans. The risk is serious enough that the National Academy of Sciences, ina report last year called for further research to “understand, limit and respond” to induced seismic events. Despite these studies, wastewater injection continues near the Oklahoma earthquakes.

The magnitude 5.7 quake near Prague was preceded by a 5.0 shock and followed by thousands of aftershocks. What made the swarm unusual is that wastewater had been pumped into abandoned oil wells nearby for 17 years without incident. In the study, researchers hypothesize that as wastewater replenished compartments once filled with oil, the pressure to keep the fluid going down had to be ratcheted up. As pressure built up, a known fault — known to geologists as the Wilzetta fault—jumped. “When you overpressure the fault, you reduce the stress that’s pinning the fault into place and that’s when earthquakes happen,” said study co-author Heather Savage, a geophysicist at Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory.

Full article

photo

Indigenous & riverbank communities occupy work camp of Amazon megaproject Bela Monte DamMarch 22, 2013 Yesterday some 150 protestors from four indigenous groups and allied riverbank communities occupied a major work camp and halted construction of the controversial Belo Monte Dam on the Xingu River in the Brazilian Amazon. The occupation paralyzed the project’s strategic Pimental construction site, where an earthen cofferdam traversing the Xingu River was recently completed. This is the third indigenous protest in less than a year that has halted dam construction as tensions have mounted over human rights violations, environmental impacts, devastated livelihoods and false promises made by the government-led dam consortium Norte Energia. The occupation began at 4 am as a group of Juruna, Xipaia, Kuruaia, and Canela protestors from the Jericoá indigenous community, together with representatives of local riverbank populations, blocked an access road to the Pimental construction camp. Protestors pushed forward to occupy the camp, rejecting attempts by agents of Brazil’s National Security Force to impede their progress by demanding that they first negotiate with the company. Upon entering the camp, the group asked workers on site to leave their installations. According to protestors the workers were helpful and supported the occupation, claiming that they are working under inhumane conditions without recourse. Indigenous protestors charge that construction of the cofferdams at the Pimental site has already had disastrous effects on the Jericoá community, located downstream on the “Big Bend” of the Xingu River. According to indigenous leaders, the quality of water has declined so drastically that the Xingu is no longer a source of potable water, and even bathing has been affected. Polluted water and explosions from dam construction have devastated fish stocks, a dietary staple and source of income for many families. While blocking off approximately 5km of the Xingu’s main channels, the Pimental cofferdams have diverted the river’s flow into a narrow channel of 450 meters, making boat transport extremely dangerous. Indigenous communities and other local populations are dependent on boat transportation for the marketing of goods and basic health and education services. A “boat transposition” system constructed by Norte Energia to supposedly address the problem has proven to be a failure. Indigenous protestors argue that Norte Energia has systematically reneged on promises of compensation for impacts of Belo Monte. According to a statement issued today by members of the Jericoá community, “the complete lack of implementation of actions to mitigate and compensate indigenous communities for the disastrous impacts of Belo Monte shows us that the project is being constructed in complete disregard for the rule of law. The rights of traditional populations are being steamrolled in the name of profits for the dam builders. We want to make it clear that we do not accept this situation and do not believe in the vague promises of NESA and the Brazilian government, that have acted irresponsibly, using the money of taxpayers channeled through the Brazilian Development Bank (BNDES) to assassinate the Xingu and the people that depend upon the river for their survival.” The protestors are demanding official recognition of their land rights and implementation of effective measures to mitigate and compensate Belo Monte’s impacts, including construction of wells, compensation for lost fisheries and alternative solutions for boat transportation. According to protestors, it’s likely that members of other local indigenous groups will join the occupation in the coming days. “The protest launched today led by the Jericoá indigenous community and other riverbank populations is evidence of a much larger problem. The legally-binding conditions of the project’s environmental licenses have been continually flouted by Norte Energia and the Brazilian government,” said Maira Irigaray of Amazon Watch. “The rule of law in Brazil must be taken seriously by President Dilma Rousseff. Belo Monte should be immediately cancelled.” “At the time of project approval, the federal government launched an expensive propaganda campaign claiming that Belo Monte would have no impact on downstream communities of the Xingu River,” said Brent Millikan, Amazon Program Director at International Rivers. “The protest of the Jericoá community and other riverbank populations is further proof of what scientific experts have said from the beginning: Belo Monte will have a profound impact on the Big Bend of the Xingu and its indigenous populations. The Federal government has been lying to the Brazilian public about Belo Monte.” Source

Indigenous & riverbank communities occupy work camp of Amazon megaproject Bela Monte Dam
March 22, 2013

Yesterday some 150 protestors from four indigenous groups and allied riverbank communities occupied a major work camp and halted construction of the controversial Belo Monte Dam on the Xingu River in the Brazilian Amazon. The occupation paralyzed the project’s strategic Pimental construction site, where an earthen cofferdam traversing the Xingu River was recently completed.

This is the third indigenous protest in less than a year that has halted dam construction as tensions have mounted over human rights violations, environmental impacts, devastated livelihoods and false promises made by the government-led dam consortium Norte Energia.

The occupation began at 4 am as a group of Juruna, Xipaia, Kuruaia, and Canela protestors from the Jericoá indigenous community, together with representatives of local riverbank populations, blocked an access road to the Pimental construction camp.

Protestors pushed forward to occupy the camp, rejecting attempts by agents of Brazil’s National Security Force to impede their progress by demanding that they first negotiate with the company. Upon entering the camp, the group asked workers on site to leave their installations. According to protestors the workers were helpful and supported the occupation, claiming that they are working under inhumane conditions without recourse.

Indigenous protestors charge that construction of the cofferdams at the Pimental site has already had disastrous effects on the Jericoá community, located downstream on the “Big Bend” of the Xingu River. According to indigenous leaders, the quality of water has declined so drastically that the Xingu is no longer a source of potable water, and even bathing has been affected. Polluted water and explosions from dam construction have devastated fish stocks, a dietary staple and source of income for many families.

While blocking off approximately 5km of the Xingu’s main channels, the Pimental cofferdams have diverted the river’s flow into a narrow channel of 450 meters, making boat transport extremely dangerous. Indigenous communities and other local populations are dependent on boat transportation for the marketing of goods and basic health and education services. A “boat transposition” system constructed by Norte Energia to supposedly address the problem has proven to be a failure.

Indigenous protestors argue that Norte Energia has systematically reneged on promises of compensation for impacts of Belo Monte. According to a statement issued today by members of the Jericoá community, “the complete lack of implementation of actions to mitigate and compensate indigenous communities for the disastrous impacts of Belo Monte shows us that the project is being constructed in complete disregard for the rule of law. The rights of traditional populations are being steamrolled in the name of profits for the dam builders. We want to make it clear that we do not accept this situation and do not believe in the vague promises of NESA and the Brazilian government, that have acted irresponsibly, using the money of taxpayers channeled through the Brazilian Development Bank (BNDES) to assassinate the Xingu and the people that depend upon the river for their survival.”

The protestors are demanding official recognition of their land rights and implementation of effective measures to mitigate and compensate Belo Monte’s impacts, including construction of wells, compensation for lost fisheries and alternative solutions for boat transportation. According to protestors, it’s likely that members of other local indigenous groups will join the occupation in the coming days.

“The protest launched today led by the Jericoá indigenous community and other riverbank populations is evidence of a much larger problem. The legally-binding conditions of the project’s environmental licenses have been continually flouted by Norte Energia and the Brazilian government,” said Maira Irigaray of Amazon Watch. “The rule of law in Brazil must be taken seriously by President Dilma Rousseff. Belo Monte should be immediately cancelled.”

“At the time of project approval, the federal government launched an expensive propaganda campaign claiming that Belo Monte would have no impact on downstream communities of the Xingu River,” said Brent Millikan, Amazon Program Director at International Rivers. “The protest of the Jericoá community and other riverbank populations is further proof of what scientific experts have said from the beginning: Belo Monte will have a profound impact on the Big Bend of the Xingu and its indigenous populations. The Federal government has been lying to the Brazilian public about Belo Monte.”

Source

photo

decolonizingmedia: Decolonize the Encroachment: Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources vs. Grassy Narrows First Nation Logging permits can now be issued on First Nations lands A huge decision came down today from the Ontario court of appeal which now states that: “the Ontario government has the authority to issue logging permits on Grassy Narrows First Nation’s traditional territory”. This decision completely overturns the Keewatin supreme court decision of August 2011 which stated, in decisive and certain terms, “that the province of Ontario has no jurisdiction to interfere with the rights of First Nations by authorizing development on Treaty 3 lands”. Apparently colonial courts and government can simply disregard inherent Indigenous rights whenever and however they so choose, in order to place the economic interests of the Settler Colonial State and “its” resources ahead of the treaty rights of Indigenous Peoples. This is what justice looks like.

decolonizingmedia:

Decolonize the Encroachment: Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources vs. Grassy Narrows First Nation

Logging permits can now be issued on First Nations lands

A huge decision came down today from the Ontario court of appeal which now states that: “the Ontario government has the authority to issue logging permits on Grassy Narrows First Nation’s traditional territory”.

This decision completely overturns the Keewatin supreme court decision of August 2011 which stated, in decisive and certain terms, “that the province of Ontario has no jurisdiction to interfere with the rights of First Nations by authorizing development on Treaty 3 lands”.

Apparently colonial courts and government can simply disregard inherent Indigenous rights whenever and however they so choose, in order to place the economic interests of the Settler Colonial State and “its” resources ahead of the treaty rights of Indigenous Peoples.

This is what justice looks like.

(via nitanahkohe)

photo

Amazon Indians unite against Canadian oil giantMarch 14, 2013 Amazon Indians from Peru and Brazil have joined together to stop a Canadian oil company destroying their land and threatening the lives of uncontacted tribes. Hundreds of Matsés Indians gathered on the border of Peru and Brazil last Saturday and called on their governments to stop the exploration, warning that the work will devastate their forest home. The oil giant Pacific Rubiales is headquartered in Canada and has already started oil exploration in ‘Block 135’ in Peru, which lies directly over an area proposed as an uncontacted tribes reserve. In a rare interview with Survival, a Matsés woman said, ‘Oil will destroy the place where our rivers are born. What will happen to the fish? What will the animals drink?’ The Matsés number around 2,200 and live along the Peru-Brazil border. Together with the closely-related Matis tribe, they were known as the ‘Jaguar people’ for their facial decorations and tattoos, which resembled the jaguar’s whiskers and teeth. The Matsés were first contacted in the 1960s, and have since suffered from diseases introduced by outsiders. Uncontacted tribes are also at extreme risk from contact with outsiders through the introduction of diseases to which they have little or no immunity. Despite promising to protect the rights of its indigenous citizens, the Peruvian government has allowed the $36 million project to go ahead. Contractors will cut hundreds of miles of seismic testing lines through the forest home of the uncontacted tribes, and drill exploratory wells. The government has also granted a license for oil explorations to go ahead in ‘Block 137’, just north of ‘Block 135’, which lies directly on Matsés land. Despite massive pressure from the company, the tribe is firmly resisting the oil company’s activities in their forest. The effects of oil work are also likely to be felt across the border in Brazil’s Javari Valley, home to several other uncontacted tribes, as seismic testing and the construction of wells threaten to pollute the headwaters of several rivers on which the tribes depend. Survival’s Director Stephen Corry said, ‘The Canadian state was founded on the theft of tribal land. When Europeans invaded Canada, they introduced alien diseases, seized control of natural resources, and brought about the extinction of entire peoples. It’s a great irony that a Canadian company today is poised to commit the same crimes against tribes in Peru. Why doesn’t the Peruvian government uphold its own commitments to tribal rights? History tells us that when uncontacted peoples’ land is invaded, death, disease and destruction follow.’ Source

Amazon Indians unite against Canadian oil giant
March 14, 2013

Amazon Indians from Peru and Brazil have joined together to stop a Canadian oil company destroying their land and threatening the lives of uncontacted tribes.

Hundreds of Matsés Indians gathered on the border of Peru and Brazil last Saturday and called on their governments to stop the exploration, warning that the work will devastate their forest home.

The oil giant Pacific Rubiales is headquartered in Canada and has already started oil exploration in ‘Block 135’ in Peru, which lies directly over an area proposed as an uncontacted tribes reserve.

In a rare interview with Survival, a Matsés woman said, ‘Oil will destroy the place where our rivers are born. What will happen to the fish? What will the animals drink?’

The Matsés number around 2,200 and live along the Peru-Brazil border. Together with the closely-related Matis tribe, they were known as the ‘Jaguar people’ for their facial decorations and tattoos, which resembled the jaguar’s whiskers and teeth.

The Matsés were first contacted in the 1960s, and have since suffered from diseases introduced by outsiders. Uncontacted tribes are also at extreme risk from contact with outsiders through the introduction of diseases to which they have little or no immunity.

Despite promising to protect the rights of its indigenous citizens, the Peruvian government has allowed the $36 million project to go ahead. Contractors will cut hundreds of miles of seismic testing lines through the forest home of the uncontacted tribes, and drill exploratory wells.

The government has also granted a license for oil explorations to go ahead in ‘Block 137’, just north of ‘Block 135’, which lies directly on Matsés land. Despite massive pressure from the company, the tribe is firmly resisting the oil company’s activities in their forest.

The effects of oil work are also likely to be felt across the border in Brazil’s Javari Valley, home to several other uncontacted tribes, as seismic testing and the construction of wells threaten to pollute the headwaters of several rivers on which the tribes depend.

Survival’s Director Stephen Corry said, ‘The Canadian state was founded on the theft of tribal land. When Europeans invaded Canada, they introduced alien diseases, seized control of natural resources, and brought about the extinction of entire peoples. It’s a great irony that a Canadian company today is poised to commit the same crimes against tribes in Peru. Why doesn’t the Peruvian government uphold its own commitments to tribal rights? History tells us that when uncontacted peoples’ land is invaded, death, disease and destruction follow.’

Source

photos

Tens of thousands of Taiwanese have protested to demand that the government scrap a $10 billion nuclear power plant slated to begin operating in two years.
March 9, 2013

Saturday’s protests were held in four cities. Many protesters chanted “We must not put the future of our children up for a vote.”

The government says halting the project could lead to electricity shortages and has proposed a public referendum to resolve the issue. But at least half of the eligible voters need to vote for a referendum to pass, which activists say will work against them.

Taiwan’s opposition party has long opposed nuclear power, and public caution over nuclear safety has risen following the 2011 nuclear disaster in Japan.

Source

photo

Here are just a few of the largest budget cuts from the sequester that went into effect on March 1. $85 billion will be cut in 2013 with $1.2 trillion in deficit reduction over ten years. Health care $20 million cut from the Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting Programs  $10 million cut from the World Trade Center Health Program Fund  $168 million cut from Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration  $75 million cut from the Aging and Disability Services Programs Housing $199 million cut from public housing  $96 million cut from Homeless Assistance Grants  $17 million cut from Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS  $19 million cut from Housing for the Elderly  $175 million cut from Low Income Home Energy Assistance Disaster and Emergency $928 million cut from FEMA’s disaster relief money  $6 million cut from Emergency Food and Shelter $70 million cut from the Agricultural Disaster Relief Fund at USDA $61 million cut from the Hazardous Substance Superfund at EPA $125 million cut from the Wildland Fire Management $53 million cut from Salaries and Expenses at the Food Safety and Inspection Service Obamacare $13 million cut from the Consumer Operated and Oriented Plan Program (Co-ops) $57 million cut from the Health Care Fraud and Abuse Control  $51 million cut from the Prevention and Public Health Fund  $27 million cut from the State Grants and Demonstrations  $44 million cut from the Affordable Insurance Exchange Grants program Education $633 million cut from the Department of Education’s Special Education programs  $184 million cut from Rehabilitation Services and Disability Research  $71 million cut from administration at the Office of Federal Student Aid  $116 million cut from Higher Education  $86 million cut from Student Financial Assistance Immigration $512 million cut from Customs and Border Protection  $17 million cut from Automation Modernization, Customs and Border Protection  $20 million cut from Border Security Fencing, Infrastructure, and Technology Security $79 million cut from Embassy Security, Construction, and Maintenance  $604 million cut from National Nuclear Security Administration  $232 million cut from the Federal Aviation Administration  $394 million cut from Defense Environmental Cleanup Source

Here are just a few of the largest budget cuts from the sequester that went into effect on March 1. $85 billion will be cut in 2013 with $1.2 trillion in deficit reduction over ten years.

Health care

  • $20 million cut from the Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting Programs 
  • $10 million cut from the World Trade Center Health Program Fund 
  • $168 million cut from Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration 
  • $75 million cut from the Aging and Disability Services Programs

Housing

  • $199 million cut from public housing 
  • $96 million cut from Homeless Assistance Grants 
  • $17 million cut from Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS 
  • $19 million cut from Housing for the Elderly 
  • $175 million cut from Low Income Home Energy Assistance

Disaster and Emergency

  • $928 million cut from FEMA’s disaster relief money 
  • $6 million cut from Emergency Food and Shelter
  • $70 million cut from the Agricultural Disaster Relief Fund at USDA
  • $61 million cut from the Hazardous Substance Superfund at EPA
  • $125 million cut from the Wildland Fire Management
  • $53 million cut from Salaries and Expenses at the Food Safety and Inspection Service

Obamacare

  • $13 million cut from the Consumer Operated and Oriented Plan Program (Co-ops)
  • $57 million cut from the Health Care Fraud and Abuse Control 
  • $51 million cut from the Prevention and Public Health Fund 
  • $27 million cut from the State Grants and Demonstrations 
  • $44 million cut from the Affordable Insurance Exchange Grants program

Education

  • $633 million cut from the Department of Education’s Special Education programs 
  • $184 million cut from Rehabilitation Services and Disability Research 
  • $71 million cut from administration at the Office of Federal Student Aid 
  • $116 million cut from Higher Education 
  • $86 million cut from Student Financial Assistance

Immigration

  • $512 million cut from Customs and Border Protection 
  • $17 million cut from Automation Modernization, Customs and Border Protection 
  • $20 million cut from Border Security Fencing, Infrastructure, and Technology

Security

  • $79 million cut from Embassy Security, Construction, and Maintenance 
  • $604 million cut from National Nuclear Security Administration 
  • $232 million cut from the Federal Aviation Administration 
  • $394 million cut from Defense Environmental Cleanup

Source

text

Study: More than 100 million Americans drinking ‘Toxic Trash’ water

February 28, 2013

Watchdog organization Environmental Working Group (EWG) looked at 2011 water quality tests for over 200 municipal water systems that affect 100 million people in 43 states. 

In their analysis published Wednesday, the group documents that all the systems had water polluted with chemicals called trihalomethanes—chemicals caused when chlorine, used as a disinfectant, mingles with rotting organic matter such as farm runoff or sewage.

While the EPA refers to these trihalomethanes as “disinfection byproducts,” EWG says they are “toxic trash.”

Trihalomethanes have been linked to a range of health problems including bladder cancer, colon and rectal cancer, birth defects, low birth weight and miscarriage.

While only the municipal water system of Davenport, Iowa showed levels that exceeded the upper legal limit the EPA established in 1998 of 80 parts per billion of trihalomethanes in drinking water, EWG points to multiple studies showing an increased risk of bladder cancer caused by much lower levels of trihalomethanes.

“New science makes a compelling case for stronger regulations and a stricter legal limit,” said Renee Sharp, a senior scientist at EWG and co-author of the analysis.

Further, EWG’s analysis notes that the levels of this “toxic trash” recorded are for annual averages, but there are likely contamination spikes, something of particular danger for pregnant women.

“Many people are likely exposed to far higher concentrations of trihalomethanes than anyone really knows,” stated Sharp.  “For most water systems, trihalomethane contamination fluctuates from month to month, sometimes rising well beyond the legal limit set by the federal Environmental Protection Agency.”

The problem with trihalomethanes arises because water treatment facilities are forced to deal with contaminants to begin with, so EWG says improvements, which are ultimately less costly, must be made to have cleaner source water.

Among EWG’s recommendations:

  • Congress should reform farm policies to provide more funds to programs designed to keep agricultural pollutants such as manure, fertilizer, pesticides and soil out of tap water.     
  • Congress should renew the “conservation compliance” provisions of the 1985 farm bill by tying wetland and soil protection requirements to crop insurance programs, by requiring farm businesses that receive subsidies to update their conservation plans and by strengthening the government’s enforcement tools.
  • Congress must allocate significant money to help repair and upgrade the nation’s water infrastructure.     
  • Source water protection programs should be significantly expanded, including efforts to prevent or reduce pollution of source waters and to conserve land in buffer zones around public water supplies. Financial support for these projects is crucial.

Source

photo

The question no one is asking about the Keystone XLJanuary 30, 2013 Right now in Texas, a foreign corporation, TransCanada, is using our government’s 5th Amendment right of eminent domain to confiscate private land belonging to Americans, to build a massive oil pipeline so TransCanada can ship oil from the Gulf of Mexico to non-Americans around the world. Oil, by the way, that will accelerate our planet’s plunge into global warming-induced catastrophe. So the question is, “Why?” Last year, President Obama approved the southern leg of the Keystone XL pipeline, which will transport deadly Canadian tar-sands oil from Oklahoma down to the Gulf of Mexico in Texas where it will be refined and then promptly placed on oil rigs to be sold in South America, Europe, and Asia. They get the oil; we get the poison coming out of the refinery smokestacks. Odds are little of oil from the Keystone XL pipeline will make it into American markets. According to TransCanada itself, this project will NOT reduce the price of gas in the United States (it will actually increase gas prices in the Midwest). It will not reduce our dependence on foreign oil. It will create only a few thousand temporary jobs. And it will put our land and underground aquifers at risk of oil contamination, while presenting to terrorists a sweet little thousand-mile-long target they can take out with a bit of dynamite. And rather than slowing climate change, this pipeline will take us over the tipping point. Environmentalists like Bill McKibbin call it a “ticking time bomb” for the environment. And NASA scientist James Hansen calls completion of the pipeline “game over for the planet.”   So, again, why is construction of this pipeline allowed to continue? Why would a foreign corporation push so hard that people like 78-year-old great grandmother Eleanor Fairchild was arrested last October for trespassing on her own property as she tried to stop TransCanada’s bulldozers from ripping a hole through her 300-acre ranch? Why is the state of Texas allowing a foreign corporation to seize land through eminent domain to build an oil pipeline, when in 2002 the state transportation department forbid the use of eminent domain to build new roads across Texas?   And why is it that we’ve allowed this foreign corporation, TransCanada, to launchnumerous SLAPP lawsuits against peaceful activists and property owners, threatening them with “losing their homes and life’s savings” if they continue protesting further construction of the pipeline? And, most importantly, why, residing on a rapidly warming planet, are we doubling-down on 19th Century dirty energy sources like fossil fuels, when we should be focusing on 21st century clean energy sources like solar and wind? Consider this:  Last week in Chattanooga, Tennessee a massive solar power facility comprising of over 33,600 individual solar modules capable of producing 13.1 gigawatt hours of electricity every year was turned on. It’s big enough to power 1,200 homes, but will be used to power a Volkswagen manufacturing plant. And it’s the biggest solar installation ever built in the state of Tennessee.   This solar farm was built by an American company, Silicon Ranch. No Canadian tar oil necessary.  So, instead of letting foreign companies build terrorist-target oil pipelines across our entire country, shouldn’t we be supporting homegrown companies that could make America the worldwide leader in renewable energy? Another “for-example”: Did you know that the United States just passed Germany as the number-two country in the world when it comes to producing wind power? Did you know that the largest wind farm in the world, the Alta Wind Energy Center, is located right here in the United States in Kern County, California? The Department of Energy estimates that 20 percent of our national energy could be produced by wind come 2030. But that’s only if our government embraces wind power with the same enthusiasm that we embrace Canada’s tar sands oil. It’s a no-brainer. And it’s what the rest of the world is doing, too. The world is rushing toward clean energy, from the 1.3 million solar power systemscurrently online in Germany producing 28 billion kilowatts of energy annually, to theLondon Array off-shore wind farm (the largest of its kind),  producing 630 enough electricity to power more than 470,000 homes. So given all of this, tell me again why we’re building the Keystone XL pipeline? Why, with all this potential for clean and renewable energy, are we arresting Americans for trespassing on their own property?  It sure looks like it’s just so a foreign corporation can get rid of their toxic oil, and a handful of billionaires in Texas can make big profits refining and exporting it. Our clean energy success stories are hidden from the news media, and our lawmakers are doing the bidding of Big Oil, turning our nation into the place where foreign corporations can do the dirty work of fossil fuel refining far, far away from their own populations. The President spoke about climate change in his Second Inaugural. But he’ll have a chance to do something more than give a good speech come March when the rest of the Keystone XL pipeline is set to be approved. So, let’s keep the pressure on our lawmakers and our news media. All around the world, and right here at home, we see the potential for clean energy use on a massive scale. We have 21st Century energy solutions that work now, today; we don’t need another 19th Century oil pipeline. Source Of course the answer to this “why?” question is because it is profitable for TransCanada to build the pipeline. Millions of lobbying dollars are spent to see the Keystone XL be built. The biggest push back against the Keystone XL has been led by environmental groups engaging in direct action to stop this dirty energy. The Tar Sands Blockade is hosting another training camp in Oklahoma March 17 to 22. Check it out if you’re in the area! 

The question no one is asking about the Keystone XL
January 30, 2013

Right now in Texas, a foreign corporation, TransCanada, is using our government’s 5th Amendment right of eminent domain to confiscate private land belonging to Americans, to build a massive oil pipeline so TransCanada can ship oil from the Gulf of Mexico to non-Americans around the world. Oil, by the way, that will accelerate our planet’s plunge into global warming-induced catastrophe.

So the question is, “Why?”

Last year, President Obama approved the southern leg of the Keystone XL pipeline, which will transport deadly Canadian tar-sands oil from Oklahoma down to the Gulf of Mexico in Texas where it will be refined and then promptly placed on oil rigs to be sold in South America, Europe, and Asia. They get the oil; we get the poison coming out of the refinery smokestacks.

Odds are little of oil from the Keystone XL pipeline will make it into American markets. According to TransCanada itself, this project will NOT reduce the price of gas in the United States (it will actually increase gas prices in the Midwest). It will not reduce our dependence on foreign oil. It will create only a few thousand temporary jobs. And it will put our land and underground aquifers at risk of oil contamination, while presenting to terrorists a sweet little thousand-mile-long target they can take out with a bit of dynamite.

And rather than slowing climate change, this pipeline will take us over the tipping point. Environmentalists like Bill McKibbin call it a “ticking time bomb” for the environment. And NASA scientist James Hansen calls completion of the pipeline “game over for the planet.”  

So, again, why is construction of this pipeline allowed to continue?

Why would a foreign corporation push so hard that people like 78-year-old great grandmother Eleanor Fairchild was arrested last October for trespassing on her own property as she tried to stop TransCanada’s bulldozers from ripping a hole through her 300-acre ranch?

Why is the state of Texas allowing a foreign corporation to seize land through eminent domain to build an oil pipeline, when in 2002 the state transportation department forbid the use of eminent domain to build new roads across Texas?  

And why is it that we’ve allowed this foreign corporation, TransCanada, to launchnumerous SLAPP lawsuits against peaceful activists and property owners, threatening them with “losing their homes and life’s savings” if they continue protesting further construction of the pipeline?

And, most importantly, why, residing on a rapidly warming planet, are we doubling-down on 19th Century dirty energy sources like fossil fuels, when we should be focusing on 21st century clean energy sources like solar and wind?

Consider this: 

Last week in Chattanooga, Tennessee a massive solar power facility comprising of over 33,600 individual solar modules capable of producing 13.1 gigawatt hours of electricity every year was turned on. It’s big enough to power 1,200 homes, but will be used to power a Volkswagen manufacturing plant. And it’s the biggest solar installation ever built in the state of Tennessee.  

This solar farm was built by an American company, Silicon Ranch. No Canadian tar oil necessary. 

So, instead of letting foreign companies build terrorist-target oil pipelines across our entire country, shouldn’t we be supporting homegrown companies that could make America the worldwide leader in renewable energy?

Another “for-example”: Did you know that the United States just passed Germany as the number-two country in the world when it comes to producing wind power? Did you know that the largest wind farm in the world, the Alta Wind Energy Center, is located right here in the United States in Kern County, California?

The Department of Energy estimates that 20 percent of our national energy could be produced by wind come 2030. But that’s only if our government embraces wind power with the same enthusiasm that we embrace Canada’s tar sands oil.

It’s a no-brainer. And it’s what the rest of the world is doing, too.

The world is rushing toward clean energy, from the 1.3 million solar power systemscurrently online in Germany producing 28 billion kilowatts of energy annually, to theLondon Array off-shore wind farm (the largest of its kind),  producing 630 enough electricity to power more than 470,000 homes.

So given all of this, tell me again why we’re building the Keystone XL pipeline? Why, with all this potential for clean and renewable energy, are we arresting Americans for trespassing on their own property?  It sure looks like it’s just so a foreign corporation can get rid of their toxic oil, and a handful of billionaires in Texas can make big profits refining and exporting it.

Our clean energy success stories are hidden from the news media, and our lawmakers are doing the bidding of Big Oil, turning our nation into the place where foreign corporations can do the dirty work of fossil fuel refining far, far away from their own populations. The President spoke about climate change in his Second Inaugural. But he’ll have a chance to do something more than give a good speech come March when the rest of the Keystone XL pipeline is set to be approved.

So, let’s keep the pressure on our lawmakers and our news media. All around the world, and right here at home, we see the potential for clean energy use on a massive scale. We have 21st Century energy solutions that work now, today; we don’t need another 19th Century oil pipeline.

Source

Of course the answer to this “why?” question is because it is profitable for TransCanada to build the pipeline. Millions of lobbying dollars are spent to see the Keystone XL be built.

The biggest push back against the Keystone XL has been led by environmental groups engaging in direct action to stop this dirty energy. The Tar Sands Blockade is hosting another training camp in Oklahoma March 17 to 22. Check it out if you’re in the area! 

Following