Calculating farming’s contribution to greenhouse gas emissions is difficult, but experts agree that feeding the world’s people has tremendous climate and environmental impacts. Estimates of global emissions from farms range widely. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency puts them at 24 per cent, including deforestation, making agriculture the second-largest emitter after heat and electricity.

Agriculture contributes to global warming in a number of ways. Methane and nitrous oxide, which are more potent than CO2 but remain in the atmosphere for shorter times, make up about 65 per cent of agricultural emissions. Methane comes mainly from cattle and nitrous oxide from fertilizers and wastes. According to the World Resources Institute, “Smaller sources include manure management, rice cultivation, field burning of crop residues, and fuel use on farms.” Net emissions are also created when forests and wetlands are cleared for farming, as these “carbon sinks” usually absorb and store more carbon than the farms that replace them. Transporting and processing agricultural products also contribute to global warming.

We need to eat. So what’s the answer? That obesity is epidemic in parts of the world while people starve elsewhere, and that an estimated one-third of food gets wasted, shows improving distribution and reducing waste are good places to start — but won’t be enough to significantly curtail agriculture’s contribution to climate change.

Reducing meat and animal-product consumption and production — especially beef — would cut emissions, but wouldn’t get us all the way.

Some suggest finding better ways to feed as many as nine billion people by 2050 means rethinking our agricultural systems. Industrial agriculture has made it possible to produce large amounts of food efficiently, but comes with problems, including pollution, reduced biodiversity, pesticide resistance and consequent increased chemical use, destruction of forests and wetlands, and human health issues such as antibiotic resistance. Soil loss and degradation, increased drought and flooding and changing growing patterns caused by climate change add to the complexity.

Some say the best fix is genetic modification — to produce more nutritious plants that can withstand pests and a changing climate. Others note that when humans try to improve on or override nature, the outcome is often not what was expected. And a U.S. National Academies of Science report concludes, “GMO crops have not, to date, increased actual yields.” Failing to recognize that everything in nature is interconnected has led to numerous unintended consequences, from DDT causing bird deaths and toxic buildup in the food chain to widespread antibiotic use facilitating the evolution of “superbugs”.

The growing field of agroecology — working with nature — is one solution. Many researchers argue it’s more efficient, less environmentally damaging and more equitable for farmers and local communities than industrial methods and GMOs.

The goal, writes University of California-Berkeley agroecology professor Miguel Altieri, “is to design an agroecosystem that mimics the structure and function of local natural ecosystems; that is, a system with high species diversity and a biologically active soil, one that promotes natural pest control, nutrient recycling and high soil cover to prevent resource losses.”

A study by the Rodale Institute, a research organization devoted to organic farming, concluded global adoption of agroecological practices such as “cover crops, compost, crop rotation and reduced tillage” could “sequester more carbon than is currently emitted.”

About 40 per cent of Earth’s land surface is used for agriculture, entailing massive geophysical alteration, so working with nature as much as possible to maintain or restore balance to natural systems makes sense. Agroecology appears to be a better way to feed humanity than doubling down on industrial agricultural, from many angles: reducing pollution and chemical use, enhancing rather than degrading soils, increasing biodiversity, protecting water, growing healthier food and creating more equitable food systems.

In This Changes Everything, Naomi Klein quotes former UN Rapporteur on the Right to Food Olivier De Schutter: “Today’s scientific evidence demonstrates that agroecological methods outperform the use of chemical fertilizers in boosting food production where the hungry live — especially in unfavourable environments.” He further notes, “agroecological projects have shown an average crop yield increase of 80% in 57 developing countries, with an average increase of 116% for all African projects.”

We are part of nature, so harming it hurts us. The planet provides resources to feed us. We must learn to use them sustainably.

Written with contributions from David Suzuki Foundation Senior Editor Ian Hanington.

Learn more at www.davidsuzuki.org.

Image: Asian Development Bank/Flickr

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

More than 60 organisations from around the world are calling for a carbon levy on fossil fuel extraction to help pay for the climate change impacts on the most vulnerable countries.

The Carbon Levy Project declaration argues that fossil fuel companies are causing approximately 70 per cent of the climate change experienced today.

As a result, these companies should have to help mobilise funds to provide compensation for the damage, it says. This would be done through a tax on extraction (as opposed to emissions) the declaration explains.

Renowned climate scientist Naomi Oreskes, author Naomi Klein, 350.org’s Bill McKibben, and Greenpeace’s Kumi Naidoo, along with Ronny Jumeau, the Seychelles Ambassador to the UN, and Yeb Sano of the Philippines, have all signed the declaration following this month’s historic Paris Agreement.

On December 12, the world agreed to keep global warming to “well below 2°C” with the aim of trying to keep the global average temperature increase to just 1.5°C.

However, even these temperature goals will not stop some climate impacts already being felt by the most climate-vulnerable nations.

“Vulnerable communities on the frontline of climate change are already suffering worse droughts, more intense storms, and their homes are already being encroached upon by rising sea levels. They are already suffering loss and damage from climate change,” reads the declaration.

Not only are fossil fuel companies responsible for climate change, but many of them have, for years, supported campaigns denying climate science, in order to slow government action.

The most prominent example is ExxonMobil, which is currently being investigated in New York for its climate denial efforts.

“These big oil, coal and gas companies are continuing to reap millions in profit, while the poor are paying with their lives.  While the Paris Agreement sends a strong signal that fossil fuels must be kept in the ground, on the way to that goal, these companies should be paying for the damage they’ve already caused,” said Julie Anne Richards of the Climate Justice Programme, campaigning for a carbon Levy.

She added: “We support work by allies on legal strategies to bring the fossil fuel industry to account for the damage their product is causing. And it is crucial to ensure that fossil fuels are phased out and replaced by renewable energy by mid-century.”

Photo: Wikimedia commons

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Blackmail. Deception. Public manipulation.

These are just some of the charges leveled against ExxonMobil at a mock trial that took place in Paris, Saturday to coincide with the ongoing international climate negotiations at COP21.

The trial, held in Paris, alleged Exxon’s work at funding climate science had put the planet, people’s health and communities from Texas to Nigeria at risk.

The trial was hosted by Canadian author Naomi Klein and climate change activist and author Bill McKibben and brought together key witnesses to discuss Exxon’s role in confusing the public about the dangers of human-caused climate change.

Two investigations by the LA Times and Inside Climate News revealed Exxon scientists warned the company about the impacts of burning fossil fuels in the 1970s.

But the trial heard how scientists were directed to keep that information secret from shareholders and the public.

Since the 70s Exxon was involved in trade organizations, think tanks and lobbying organizations that have misled the public about greenhouse gases, climate change and climate science.

The trial, titled Exxon vs. The People, was presided over by three judges including indigenous rights and 350.org campaigner Clayton Thomas-Muller, actor Peter Sarsgaard and Milañ Loeak, daughter of Christopher Loeak, president of the Marshall Islands.

Cindy Baxter, a lead witness and curator of the website Exxon Secrets, took the stand to testify how Exxon funded organizations that have cast doubt on climate science, including the Competitive Enterprise Institute and the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow.

Both organizations are represented in Paris and aim to cast doubt on climate science and the ‘global warming hype’ at the COP21 climate negotiations.

Texas environmental justice advocate Bryan Parras, born in 1977, told the trial a subsidiary of Exxon caused severe impacts on human and environmental health in the state where his community lives.

“Did it surprise you that Exxon has been studying climate change for you entire life?” Klein asked.

Perras responded: “Did anyone expect that they didn’t know or wouldn’t hide it?”

“I honestly don’t trust anything these companies say. We should cast seeds of doubt on their campaigns and in their markets.”

Parras said Exxon’s deception made him angry, adding: “What else did they know and what else are they saying? What did they know about toxicity and cancers? Why did it take us so long to get that information?”

Author and fracking expert Sandra Steingraber, biologist and author of Living Downstream, also took the stand.

She said: “Exxon is the world’s largest public natural gas producer and it extracts oil and gas via fracking all over the world, particularly in the U.S. but also more recently in Argentina.”

Klein said: “We’ve talked a lot about local health impacts of fracking, but I also want to ask you about climate impacts of fracking since we are here at the same time as climate talks.”

Steingraber replied that natural gas was a “catastrophe” for the climate and that Exxon had also pushed the idea that gas was climate friendly.

Steingraber is a member of Center for Health Professionals in New York, a group of scientists, physicians, nurses providing watchdog evidence on the harms and risks of fracking since 2012.  She said a review of more than 500 studies found fracking was a risk to human health.

“The climate crisis is a parenting crisis which means it’s a human rights crisis,” Steingraber said.

“For Exxon to be involved in a misinformation about the science of climate is a strike against parenthood, against human knowledge and scientific progress.”

Ken Henshaw, activist with Social Action Nigeria, described the social and political impacts of Exxon’s activities in Nigeria.

“Africa is sometimes described as a continent suffering from the effects of climate change. Have you seen these effects?” McKibben asked Henshaw.

“In the Niger Delta where I lived in 2012 there was massive flooding. Houses were completely submerged. An entire planting season was lost,” Henshaw said.

McKibben asked: “Rex Tillerson, the CEO of Exxon, said if climate change happened to cause any inclement weather, we would find technological ways to adapt to that. Have people figured that out in Nigeria?”

“No,” Henshaw responded. “When the 2012 floods happened, the oil companies announced we should move to higher ground. What higher ground? To whose houses?”

Antonia Juhasz, journalist and energy analyst, testified to the quality of the reporting done around the revelations

“It wasn’t just that Exxon funded deniers outside government, it helped push policy inside government to change the course of policy inside so we would not have policies that addressed the climate crisis.”

In her closing argument, Klein addressed the trial’s judges.

“We aren’t asking you to put a price on that which is priceless. We have heard stories of life lost because of melting ice. We have heard stories of ancient cultures threat because of climate change. We have heard stories of Exxon’s discriminatory disregard of human life, well being and health.

“It is Exxon’s crime that it believes money trumps life,” Klein said.

“There is no price that can be placed on the Marshall Islands, on Arctic cultures, on our lives and what we pass on to our children. But we have a duty to seek justice.”

Judge Thomas-Muller said:“Given that as a court we lack ability to compel testimony of xon, we are unable to reach conclusion of guilt or innocence.”x

“We can ask that other courts in other jurisdictions that have the power to summon Exxon do so with haste.“

“We judge that this will represent one of and perhaps the biggest examples of corporate crime in history.”

Fellow judge Loeak said she knew the efforts of the world’s negotiators can be hampered by the denial and deception of the world’s major fossil fuel companies.

“Had Exxon merely stated 25 years ago what they knew —that climate change was real, perilous and required decision action — extraordinary damage could have been avoided.”

Actor Sarsgaard ended the trial on this note: “The burden of proof now rests squarely with this corporation that these documents don’t demonstrate what they seem prima facie to demonstrate: a profound disregard for this planet and its people."

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

In her new book, This Changes Everything, Canadian author Naomi Klein positions climate change as a form of social disaster, which, like a lot of other disasters cannot be gazed upon for too long.

We are constantly finding ways and reasons to “look away,” she writes, “or maybe we do look – really look – but then, inevitably, we seem to forget.”

“Climate change is like that; it’s hard to keep it in your head for very long. We engage in this odd form of on-again-off-again ecological amnesia for perfectly rational reasons. We deny because we fear that letting in the full reality of this crisis will change everything.”

“And we are right.”

Part of the strategy of this forgetting or looking away, as Klein frames it, is in the myriad technical, lifestyle or personal ‘solutions’ to a warming globe that refuse to question the deeper roots of the climate crisis, the structural and socio-economic logic both creating the problem and masquerading as its solution.

The challenge, says Klein, is looking at the challenge of climate change head on, and realizing, whether we like it or not, it undoes a lot of what we take for granted in our everyday notions of the political, the economic, the corporate and the radical.

Canada, a world leader in the release of greenhouse gas emissions, is no exception.

The country's current political mantra – that nothing but increasing resource extraction can ensure us a stable economy – is one of those everyday presumptions that is drastically challenged in the face of global climate change.

Much of the work we do at DeSmog Canada is dedicated to bringing to light Canada’s failure to meaningfully address climate change. And to discuss how the scientific reality of climate change affects Canada's future.

This country’s efforts in the political sphere to bolster oilsands and natural gas development, western coal exports and proposed oil pipelines heading in literally every cardinal direction, all fail to heed the immediate message of climate science: that no future stable economy can rely on carbon-intensive development.

Climate change will change everything in Canada, too, there’s no question of that.

The question is whether we will become leaders in that change, or watch those early opportunities – to hitch our economy to a clean energy future – pass by.

Klein recently told DeSmog Canada that our work was an “indispensible tool” while she was writing This Changes Everything.

Right now DeSmog Canada is in the middle of our first-ever crowd-funding campaign on Kickstarter.

Klein lent her support to our campaign because she recognized that a crucial part of addressing climate change is looking at it face on and refusing to look away.

And that’s a big part of what we do here at DeSmog Canada – face the tough issues and ask the hard questions. 

We believe that Canadians deserve strong leadership and a secure energy future, one that accounts for the reality of a changing global climate, not one that looks away.

If you believe that too, I hope you’ll join us and the other Canadians who want to have a more constructive debate about Canada’s climate and energy future.

Image Credit: Nicolas Haeringer, 2008.  

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

"We don't know what the hell is going on under the ground."

That's what Crystal Lameman, a member of the Beaver Lake Cree Nation recently told me. On June 27, an oil spill occurred at Canadian Natural Resources Limited's (CNRL) Primrose operations 75km east of Lac la Biche. The spill happened on the Cold Lake Air Weapons Range (CLAWR), located in a region The Royal Canadian Airforce calls "the inhospitable wilds of northern Alberta and Saskatchewan." This 'inhospitable' region happens to be in her community's traditional hunting territory where her family traditionally hunted and trapped and where her elders are buried.

DeSmog Canada reported a release of bitumen emulsion, a mixture of heavy tar sands crude and water from in-situ (in ground) oil production.

Lameman told me she only heard about the spill from the press release from the Alberta Energy Regulator (AER). "It was disheartening to open my Facebook and see a link showing me the spill in our traditional hunting territory – that I had to get the information from an outside source as opposed to the information coming directly to the community."

The press release is sparse on details, but confirmed that that neither the company nor the government are certain of the volume of emulsion spilled, that the affected area is near Pad 22 but off lease, and has impacted a nearby slough. According to the release, the company has begun clean-up operations. But Lameman heard from source on site that the damage of the spill it much worse than the company, government or media are reporting.

"I was being told, there's wildlife still drinking from the water." She was also told that the 'slough' in question was actually a lake, but the lake has receded so much that industry and government are calling the lake a slough to minimize the perception of the spill. "That concerned me," she says, "and it made me want to go out there and survey the damage." And so Lameman decided it was time to find some answers. We set off to the Cold Lake Air Weapons Range, about 45 minutes east of her community.

The Journey

We pulled up to the security gate of a military base. Though I'd heard it was a weapons range, it still surprised me to see the high security and tar sands operations right on the base. Lameman was immediately denied entry and told that she needed to seek permission from an Aboriginal Liaison officer to enter the grounds, on her own traditional territory.

"I was told later that I won't be allowed in either way," Crystal tells me. "These are just the channels I have to go through. We pulled away and I just felt this sense of depression. After all this time we are still having to ask permission to utilize our land. How we walk on the land – we're still being told that, where we can and can't go."

Crystal Lameman of the Beaver Lake Cree Nation.

While regulatory bodies like the ERCB, AER, Fish and Wildlife and the federal government are monitoring, surveying, and testing, Crystal confesses, "It's scary that they're doing whatever they can to deny us access. It makes me wonder, what's happening to those beings who can't talk for themselves? How bad is it? What is it? I don't feel good about it."

Unfortunately, this isn't the first time the Beaver Lake Cree have been denied access to their own traditional territory. In 2008, they launched a lawsuit claiming that the cumulative effects of tar sands development interfere with their constitutionally-protected treaty rights to hunt, trap and fish. The nation is fighting for access to the CLAWR. Recently, a decision of the Alberta Court of Appeal rejected Canada and Alberta's attempts to have the case thrown out. 

Legal counsel for BLCN, Drew Mildon, noted: "First Nations have the strongest environmental law tools at their disposal in Canada." He went on to add that "this 'emulsion' spill is a perfect example of local impacts of the tar sands; unfortunately, the rest of us must rely on small, poverty-stricken First Nations to take courageous stands to stem the global impacts that are the debt we will pay for further tar sands development."

"Black Puddles"

According to Lameman's source, the damage was described to her as "black puddles" or "black spots" coming up in different areas. An employee on site confirmed that the tar sands emulsion seeping from the ground is not a pipeline spill. What's more, industry and government do not even know what the spill is. They also know there's a lot of oil seeping, and they don't know what it's coming from.

On site at the Cold Lake Air Weapons Range. Photo by Emma Pullman.

"The ground seepage is off-lease," says Lameman. "And the fact that they're scrambling, trying to figure out what happened, and trying to keep us out of there as much as they can validates the information I was given that this spill is worse than what they're telling us."

According to information obtained from an employee, the contaminated lake in question is likely near Burnt Lake, possibly at Ward Lake.

Site of CNRL Primrose Project via Wikimapia.

Location of emulsion seepage.

Whither CSS?

CNRL's Primrose site uses a kind of tar sands extraction called Cyclic Steam Stimulation, or CSS.

According to CNRL's website CSS is a three stage thermal recovery method where steam is first injected into the well at temperatures over 300°C and pressures of 10-12 Mpa (1450-1740 psi). This heats the bitumen in the reservoir, reducing the viscosity so that it can flow. The steam is then left to 'soak' before production begins for several weeks, mobilizing cold bitumen, and then the flow on the injection well is reversed, producing oil through the same injection well bore.

CSS diagram from Slideshare presentation, CSS Technology for Heavy Oil. 

The CSS process is only able to typically recover approximately 20% of the oil in the ground.

CSS as a process is relatively new, having been developed by Shell by accident in Venezuela after one of its steam injectors blew out. The process is becoming more common in the San Joaquin Valley of California, the Lake Maracaibo area of Venezuela, and in the tar sands.

According to ESG Solutions, a microseismic monitoring company that monitors oil and gas development, the CSS process is:

"environmentally sensitive and many risks exist … Well casings are subject to severe tensile stresses due to the high temperature, high pressure nature of the CSS process. These stresses have the potential to result in mechanical failures such as cement cracks or casing shear leading to well downtime, damaging spills or hazardous blowouts. Shear stresses also develop during the dilation of the reservoir during the steam injection, potentially causing the incursion of fluids into the overlying shales and aquifers above the caprock and causing environmental contamination and costly clean up and regulatory penalties."

Of CSS, Lameman says: "This is a whole new kind of oil mess that no one's really ever heard of in terms of tar sands production. Everyone's heard of pipeline spills and open pit mining. But I don't think the public has been told of the dangers of CSS."

Mining on an active military testing site?

The apparent dangers of CSS and the fact that seismic monitoring is needed to oversee the process are heightened when you consider that CNRL's Primrose facility operates on an active weapons testing facility.

The Cold Lake Air Weapons Range construction began in 1952 and was chosen by the Royal Canadian Air Force to be the country's premier air weapons training base. The base land in Alberta and Saskatchewan covers an area of 11,700 square kilometres. While the federal government worked out an agreement with other First Nations who were systematically pushed out of the area, Lameman's ancestors were banned without consultation or compensation.

CLAWR is said to be the "northern equivalent" of the United States Air Force's Nellis Air Force Range. It hosts over 640 actual targets and 100 realistic target complexes, including 7 simulated aerodromes with runways, tarmac, aircraft, dispersal areas and buildings, as well as mechanized military equipment such as tanks, simulated radar and missile launching sites, mock industrial sites, and command and control centres.

According to the Cold Lake Air Weapons Range website, "the Air Force conducts live fire training exercises on the CLAWR" and it appears that live fire operations are taking place this week.”

In addition to CNRL, Nexen, Husky Energy, Enbridge, Interpipe and Cenovus operate on the CLAWR.

Range activities officer at the CLAWR, Dick Brakele, says "to mix an active oil industry and an active weapons range where weapons are dropped takes a lot of imagination sometimes to ensure that the needs of both are met."

Imagination is one way to look at it.

I met up with Naomi Klein who was also reporting in the area. She told me: "Canadians should be shocked that our government is dropping test bombs in the same geographic area as massive tar sands operations. This is already the most dangerous form of fossil fuel extraction on the planet from an ecological perspective. Combining that mining with weapons testing – no matter how careful the players claim to be – is so reckless it verges on the surreal."

"This is something that everybody needs to know about."

Lameman still has a lot of questions she needs answered. To the oil companies and government she asks, "What is the magnitude of this spill? What is it? How much of the water has been affected? Did you stop it yet?"

For now, she has few answers. But the single mother of two isn't going to give up.

"This is something that everybody needs to know about because though it happens to fall within our traditional hunting territory, there's just as many non-native people as Indigenous people in this area. All of the water systems are connected. If you drink water, this is about you."

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Hundreds, perhaps thousands of people from across Canada and the US will walk into the heart of tar sands country to be part of a spiritual gathering called the Tar Sands Healing Walk on July 5th-6th.

They will come face-to-face with the environmental destruction caused by the tar sands industry. Open pit mines, tailings ponds, industrial facilities and more dominate the landscape of the walk near Fort McMurray, Alberta.

The fourteen-kilometre Healing Walk is neither a rally or a protest. Organizers describe the event as a spiritual gathering focused on healing the land, air, water and all living things harmed by the relentless expansion of the tar sands industry.

“Protests, rallies, marches are all good and necessary, but we felt like people needed something more spiritual. Something to create or strengthen a connection to the land,” says Jesse Cardinal, co-organizer of the Healing Walk.

As the international movement to stop the tar sands has grown, the Healing Walk has also grown since its birth four years ago. In its inaugural year the Healing Walk was a one-day event with one hundred participants. Hundreds and very possibly thousands will come to this year's two-day event that includes workshops, ceremonies, internationally-renowned guest speakers and the walk.

Organizers anticipate the 4th Tar Sands Healing Walk to be the largest event yet.

“First-time participants of the Healing Walk need to prepare themselves for an emotional journey,” Cardinal told DeSmog Canada.

This year's Healing Walk is attracting big name speakers such as 350.org founder Bill McKibben, author Naomi Klein, and co-founder of Idle No More Sylvia McAdam.

Invitations have been extended to Alberta premier Allison Redford and federal Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver to attend. Thus far neither have accepted the invitation.

“We want people to have an understanding of the scale and size of the tar sands industry, but we also want people to leave with a sense of hope for renewal,” says Cardinal.

Cardinal is also the coordinator of the Keepers of the Athabasca, an alliance of First Nations, Inuit, Metis, environmental groups and other concerned citizens advocating effective stewardship of the Athabasca River and Athabasca Lake Watershed. The Keepers of the Athabasca have been the main organizer of the Healing Walk from the beginning.

The Healing Walk will begin with a pipe ceremony at Crane Lake, north of Fort McMurray. First Nations elders and ceremony people will lead participants on the 14-kilometre journey through existing tar sands operations, and tailings ponds. The Athabasca River is less than ten kilometres from these industrial sites that spew toxins into its waters. Prayers for the land will be made along the way.

First Nations tar sands campaigner Clayton Thomas Muller in a recent article recalled being struck by scenes of vast deserts of wet and dry tailings ponds and industrial facilities that could have been straight out of a science fiction novel on his first Healing Walk.

A campsite is available for participants planning on staying over night and some catering will be provided by the organizers. Meet and greets as well as workshops on pipelines, First Nations cultures and tar sands impacts will take place the day before the Healing Walk. A feast and closing ceremony will conclude the event.

The Significance of the Fourth Healing Walk

Four is a significant number in many indigenous cultures. There are four seasons. Four directions. Four parts to life (mental, spiritual, emotional and physical).

“The fourth Healing Walk is significant because it indicates the ending of one cycle and the beginning of another,” explains Cardinal, who is Metis and a member of the Kikino Metis Settlement in northeastern Alberta.

Coincidentally, four organized cross-country treks will arrive in Fort McMurray to participate in the Healing Walk. Two groups are travelling from the US. A third group is coming from British Columbia.

The fourth and longest trek will be made by Dion Tootoosis who left traditional Mi'kmaq lands in Nova Scotia on June 12th and will bicycle over 5000 kilometres to reach Fort McMurray in time for the Healing Walk.

Tootoosis, from the Poundmaker Cree Nation of Saskatchewan, says he wants his journey to inspire conversations about natural resource extraction in Canada, particularly the tar sands, and stimulate discussions about solutions.

“I believe that the answer to the Alberta tar sands, and other locations across Canada where natural resources are being exploited, lies within the people of this country. Only a people know what is best for their community,” says Tootoosis in a statement.

Image Credit: Kris Krug via flickr

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.