Rural Satellite TV

Regular readers will know I have written extensively over the last year about the loss of broadcast TV in rural areas and it still seems counter productive to provide OTA digital TV in urban areas where it is readily available inexpensively via cable but not in rural areas where the only alternative is the more expensive satellite TV solution. Shaw Direct has provided a solution however so long as you apply before November for their Local Television Satellite Solution (LTSS) program. 

I first became aware of this program via the TVO web page detailing all the transmitters being shut down. It says:-

If you live in one of these markets and have been relying on television from over the air signals, you may be able to continue to receive TVO courtesy of Shaw Direct by applying for their Local Television Satellite Solution (LTSS) program.  For more information visit SHAWDIRECT.CA/DTV.

Over to Shaw where it says:-
If you haven't been a cable or satellite customer in the last 90 days, you may be eligible for the Local Television Satellite Solution (LTSS) program.* This program will allow you to continue receiving the same or similar Canadian over-the-air channels you've always enjoyed courtesy of Shaw Direct.
Please call one of our service representatives before November 30, 2012 at 1.888.782.7602 to see if you qualify.

Having applied and been “approved” I now know that one must sign a waiver with a few conditions including not having had “been a subscriber to any Cable, IPTV or Satellite TV provider within the

last 90 days“ and detailing the channels that you have lost (although the form assumes the loss of certain stations in your area and pre-prints them for you).

You also “agree to become a Shaw Direct LTSS subscriber. Shaw Direct will provide you with a receiver and basic installation at no charge in order to provide your household with local programming. The receiver will be able to meet the technical needs of the channels we are providing. The receiver will also be considered to be your property. The programming will consist of local programming feeds from within your geographic region. This programming will be provided to you at no cost. New customers to this program are only permitted from May 31, 2011 until November 30, 2012. If we have not received this form signed within this time, we will be unable to provide this solution.”

All in all it just took that phone call, was hassle free, totally without cost, installation and receiver included and we now have 9 or 10 'local channels' including CTV, CBC, GLOBAL, TVO which is about all we really need. Thanks Shaw, I am sure up the road you will be 'encouraging' us to get the 'pay for' channels (and by all accounts all that now takes is a phone call to Shaw Customer Service) but for now we are quite happy and impressed with your promotional LTSS program.

Lost your broadcast TV? Give Shaw a call, it seems too good to be true but thus far we have seen no hidden problems or costs.

Womens Institute releases Rural Voices Report.

Regular readers will know that I have been supportive of the WI's RVN project and have written both here, on their forum and directly to them about how an on line rural forum would benefit rural communities, and suggested what form it could or should take. I have been waiting to see the results of their survey since it completion in May and SOME results have now been released in the form of a Management Report.

Unfortunately said report is not very forthcoming and only details the top 5 responses in a limited number of areas of interest. We are told that a “Detailed Report” is available, however upon inquiry we were told that “The only information being released at this time is the promised Management Report and the poster.” and that “Any additional details are not being released as they will be used to assist with sourcing  additional grants.”  Huh? I am not sure how withholding data from a pubic survey of 'rural stakeholders” from those self same “stakeholders” can enhance a future grant application.

They also say that “ the budget limited quantitative and qualitative analysis in all areas and on all variables”. I understand that such limitations may preclude academic and scholarly “analysis” but as one who distrusts such “analysis” without seeing the raw data from which is was drawn I feel that perhaps this whole process and report is focused far too much on possible grants for some academic to analyze the results rather than sharing with those who participated and those who could use the data to move forward with practical initiatives. Let us “analyze” the results for ourselves!

One thing does become clear from the report and that is that the survey is biased by the type of respondent, this is no fault of the project creators, any such 'survey' is biased. An on line survey such as the one at the end of this article is biased towards those that are on line and are inclined to answer such things, in this case it was biased towards members of the WI and those already involved in their community and thus were aware of the project or were sent a survey by mail. This resulted in a predominance of older ladies responding (hardly a surprise give that it is a Women's Institute project) which is one of the few pieces of hard data shared in the report. This obviously affects the results. 

As readers will know if they have read my previous posts about this I was mainly interested and highly supportive of the stated goal of creating a “Web portal designed to foster a living ‘Rural Voices Network’ to facilitate community engagement and collaboration through online forums.” The survey was, in part, to determine how viable this goal was and how to proceed with it. I do not see the lack of funding as a major impediment to moving forward with such a 'portal' using volunteers to do both the initial installation and the subsequent moderation, although deciding upon the format and the software may be much more of a challenge. There is little or nothing said regarding this item, which to my mind is one of the major keys to rural communication and thus enabling discussion and 'engagement' in the community. There is an “existing web portal for further online engagement of rural citizens” on the RVN site but it is less than stellar and far less user friendly and functional than what I had in mind.

I will not go into the few results they have published, you can read the report for yourselves. I do note however that “As with the lack of information, younger residents rated a lack of communication networks as being more of a barrier than did older residents.” and it is the younger folks who we have to engage! I will however comment upon some of the conclusions made. The featured recommendations highlighted here are small extracts of the full text.

Recommendation #1:

In order to communicate with rural people, stakeholders and policy-makers may need to reduce their reliance on buzzwords and jargon.

Agreed, however it is not a matter of talking down to “rural people” but more a problem with academics and consultants using flowery language to justify their work when simple and concise language is usually far more precise.

Recommendation #2:

This data holds knowledge that could potentially lead to better-informed policy. Carefully planned analysis of this data, aligned with the goals of the RVN project, may provide insights to the current situation of rural residents.....

By all means 'analyze' the data but do not 'spin' it to “align with the goals of the RVN project”. Let others also see and use the raw data and detailed report and make their own conclusions.

Recommendation #3:

..... continued engagement with those individuals, organizations and communities that have made connections with the RVN project should be ensured by encouraging the continuation of the conversation

Obviously!

Recommendation #4:

More and stronger connections need to be made:.........

A means of facilitating these types of connections and fostering potential relationships – through a workshop or conference, for example – should be investigated.

Whilst 'workshops or conferences' may be useful they are limited by location, who is invited, who can attend and similar factors. An ON LINE forum is much wider in its availability and is a continuous process. Both are reliant upon interested citizens being aware of them so that they can make those 'connections'.

Recommendation #5:

Although this knowledge is valuable to have, in order for it to have real worth, this knowledge should be acted upon. The RVN project committee should find a method and means by which this information can be put into productive use. The implementation of this knowledge may take any of a number of forms ranging from a simple dissemination of the information to developing a series of public forums.

The single biggest 'action' that the RVN can take to make productive use of the knowledge gained through this project is to SHARE it. The same limitations that apply to conferences also apply to public forums.

Having waited for some time to see if the results of this survey would shed any light upon how well an on line forum would be received, but not being a recipient of any information in that regard, I now will move on and be seeking to create such a web presence privately. Build it and they will come will be my mantra. We MUST get a dialog going, even as I write I learn of more rural communities being gutted of their schools and inundated with industrial wind farms to feed the urban appetite for “clean” power. Neither of which rural resident have ANY control over!

Anyone, individual or rural organization interested in helping should contact me ASAP.

Please visit and fill out the survey I created to try and get a better idea of rural online availability and use.. Just 6 questions and results WILL be shared. Click here to see the survey.

Meet Enbridge's friend Dil Bit

The following statement was made by Miranda Holmes at the National Energy Board's Joint Review Panel hearings into the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline in Comox, BC.

-------------------------------------------------------------

Many voices have been heard during these hearings, yet one has remained silent: the oily character at the centre of the debate. I think that’s a shame and so I am using my time before the panel to allow this character’s case to be made.

Hi, my name’s Dil Bit. That’s short for Diluted Bitumen, but I feel like I’m amongst friends here, so let’s not be too formal.

I come from the tar sands and, as you know, Alberta totally digs me. Alberta’s so generous she wants to share me with everyone.

If she gets her way, I’ll be passing through British Columbia a lot in the future, so I thought I should introduce myself properly.

As fossil fuels go, I’m a bit unconventional. But, as Alberta’s favourite son Steve will tell you, I’m totally ethical. (And don’t let those jet setting celebrities tell you any different.)

I’m also way better than conventional crude oil.

For instance, my total acid concentrations are up to 20 times higher than conventional crude. My sulphur content is up to 10 times higher and I’m up to 70 times thicker. Pretty impressive, eh?

Yeah, it’s true I can be a bit abrasive. Bits of quartz, pyrite, silicates, sure I carry them around. It’s just the way I’m made.

So conventional crude doesn’t have my grit. So what? No need to point out, like those granola eaters at the Natural Resources Defense Council did, that putting me in a pipeline is “like sandblasting the inside of the pipe.”

I don’t know why the Americans have taken against me, because – like so many of them – I pack some serious heat. Thanks to my true grit and my thickness (I like to think of it as strength), I make pipes hotter than conventional crude - and harder to monitor. In fact, pipelines carrying me are16 times more likely to leak.

See? I told you I was better.

I’m Alberta’s most precious resource. You think she and Steve are going to let just anyone transport me? No way.

For my travels through British Columbia, they’re going to use Enbridge, a fine, upstanding company with an excellent track record. Why, it took Enbridge 10 years to spill half as much oil as the Exxon Valdez. And they didn’t just spill it in one spot – they spread it around.

Regulators in the US thought the three million litres of me Enbridge spilled in Michigan was so funny they compared the company to those great comedy characters the Keystone Kops.

If Enbridge maintains its current success rate it should be able to meet Steve’s federal standards, which allow undetected pipeline leaks of less than 2% of capacity per week.

For the Northern Gateway project that means Enbridge could legally leave 11 million litres of me a week behind on my way to Kitimat without getting into any serious trouble. And why should they? Eleven million litres of me would be more than three times funnier than Michigan, right?

That’s good news for me, because I’ve heard there are some mighty pretty places in northern BC and I think it would be a shame not to get to know them better.

And it’s good news for BC, because your premier’s promising lots of jobs out of oil and gas exports, and cleaning up after me will sure keep people employed.

Sorry if any of the spots I’m going to wreck is one of your favourites, but I’ve got to keep Alberta happy. You know what she’s like. 

As posted at The Common Sense Canadian

Miranda Holmes is a former journalist who spent a decade working on toxics and genetic engineering for Greenpeace and other environmental organizations in Canada and the UK.

Bureaucracy gone mad!

In case you missed it a couple in Drummondville, Quebec have been told if they do not remove or substantially reduce their front yard vegetable garden they will face fines of up to $300 a day.

Drummondville town code states: that a vegetable garden can take up 30 percent of a front yard at most. They have given Landry and Beauchamp two weeks to comply. (After an outpouring of support for their refusal to remove it, it is now reported that this deadline may be extended.)

What is wrong with this picture, this is not an overgrown patch of weeds but a very productive and well cared for vegetable garden. Should we as a society not be encouraging such initiatives, the days of manicured lawns that look nice but produce nothing but more co2 from the lawnmower than they absorb should be phased out in favor of productive use of the ever decreasing green spaces in our cities. They are not the first folk to run afoul of antiquated or less than flexible city bylaws, those for whom wild flowers are preferable to grass have also run in to the same kind of nonsense. Neither are they the first ones to be personalized for growing vegetables, last summer a woman in Michigan faced the same sort of thing but the city was forced to back down after a public outcry.

Its time for city officials and other urban residents who have their head in the sand that the food on their plates does not magically appear in the grocery store and that food shortages are becoming an increasing reality for many. Perhaps this years drought conditions across North America and the ensuing increase in prices will help bring the point home.

Want to support this couple, why not start a veggi garden in your own urban front yard, just imagine a street of houses fronted by gardens with tomatoes, sweet corn, peas, beans, carrots, beets and so on.... what a beautiful sight that would be.....

We get mail.....

Recently I have been getting an increasing amount of Email, much of it due to getting on some 'media' list directed at my efforts at Democracy Under Fire which results in many political promotional material from U.S. 'consultants'. Most is sent directly to the electronic garbage bin however once in a while I get some interesting stuff.

I welcome the updates from Lead Now “a group of young Canadians taking action together for the fair, responsible and democratic Canada that we believe in.” Their latest projects are detailed below and I encourage those who are concerned with the direction that the Harper Regime is taking our democratic processes (and that SHOULD be all of you) to get involved.

1. Pilot Campaigns to hold Conservative MPs accountable to their constituents
   
   We’d like to try an experiment: local mass-mobilization campaigns in key ridings. We’ll encourage Conservative MPs, especially back-benchers who won with less than 50% of the vote, to become pro-democracy independents before the next election. If 13 of them joined together they could shift the balance of power in Parliament, and hold the Harper Conservatives accountable to a majority of Canadians. This is a powerful strategy, and we need to do it right.
   
   Are you interested in committing your time to be part of a pilot campaign? Click here to sign up: Yes, I would like to volunteer as part of a local accountability campaign in my riding.

2. Host a Leadnow Summer Gathering (July 24-August 10)
   
   The Leadnow Summer Gatherings will connect pro-democracy Canadians in a casual setting to meet each other, make local connections, and talk about our long-term strategy. Together, we’ll take the next step in hosting a national conversation to create a long-term campaign for major improvements to our democracy, with a focus on electoral reform. Our goal is to build a game-changing strategy before the 2015 federal election to make our democracy work better for all Canadians.
   
   Today, we’d just like to know if you’d be interested in hosting a Summer Gathering. Next week, we’ll send out an invitation for everyone in the Leadnow community to find and join the gathering closest to them.
   
   You can decide whether your Summer Gathering is public or private, whether it will be a big group or just you and a few friends, and whether it will take place at a local coffee shop, in your living room, or as a backyard BBQ. Click here to learn more about hosting a Leadnow Summer Gathering: http://www.tfaforms.com/250842

3. Build the Pro-Democracy Movement Online
   
   Can’t join a Summer Gathering? No problem. Watch for another note from us in the next couple of weeks. We will ask for your feedback to help create the long-term democracy campaign focused on the 2015 election.

.......................................

The second piece of 'interesting mail was from one of those 'consultants' promoting an info-graphic detailing the resources used in raising animals for food as opposed to the vegetarian diet. This was of interest to me because I am a lifelong vegetarian, however not for reasons of animal welfare, food resources or economics but simply for healthy eating. I have nothing against those that get a portion of their protein from animal sources however I do believe that, at least in North America, that greater diversity of diet needs to be practiced, moderation and a balanced diet is more important than what is part of that intake in my view.

That said we should bear in mind, given the increasing world population and finite food sources, that as the info-graphic details it takes much more resources to provide meat protein than direct intake of vegetable protein. Something to think about!

........................................

The third bit of mail was from the Edmonton Folk Music Festival detailing their efforts to making their even 'green' and have minimal impact upon the location and the environment as detailed below.

Since the 1980’s, the Edmonton Folk Music Festival (August 9^th - 12^th) has implemented a legion of 2,000+ volunteers that include an environmental crew, who have committed to minimizing the impact that the festival has on the local grounds. This task is not easy considering the four day event attracts over 80,000 people and Gallagher Park, where the festival takes place, has no paved pathways or roads.

Since the beginning, efforts to minimize impact on the environment during the festival included:

·         Installing temporary plastic walkways to minimize damage to the park

·         Sending out cleaning crews throughout the day to pick up garbage: the morning clean-up crew, called EnviroPower, is staffed by youth volunteers and then the Site Environment crew monitors the park during the day and evenings.

·         Recycling: the Festival Site Environment collects recyclable items to minimize garbage sent to the landfill and composts organic waste generated during the Festival.

·         Restoring Gallagher Park: this includes removing facilities and equipment in a timely manner and restoring the grass.

Over the past few years, the green movement has grown and other programs that have been instated are:

·         Bringing in 5,000 washable plates to onsite concessionaries and implementing a ‘No Styrofoam’ policy on site.

·         Using Poly Lactic Acid (PLA) beer cups which derive entirely from natural corn materials, is 100% renewable through annual corn harvests and fully compostable. Installing solar panels on merchandising tents which run lights and cash registers

·         The Festival and all concessionaries use bio-degradable cutlery, napkins and other products which are composted

Congratulation to the organizers for their efforts, these large outdoor events do have a considerable impact upon the surroundings and any effort to minimize it is a good thing. Well done folks.

........................................

Please note that this is NOT an invite for every organization or 'public relations firm to send me a bunch of crap in the hope that I will republish it on my blogs. I some how have been added to a U.S. media list that has left me inundated with mostly political 'Info Blasts' that I have little or no interest in. No doubt that much of that is due to my 'Democracy Under Fire' pages but some have bled over into the 'Rural Canadian', I do like to keep up on CANADIAN political stuff and in these days of kill the messenger it is NESSARY to keep up with environmental and scientific concerns. In short if you are reading this please use restraint in using my email links supplied for those reader that are not comfortable (or internet savvy) enough to use the comment section. Dialog is good ...... but too much crap from 'media relation' types simply clogs the pipes!!

Environmental Extremes

By now any one who is not totally brain dead knows that climate change is a reality, how much of that is due to human activity is open to debate but we most certainly have a major part in in it. Given the extremes of weather and threats to our rivers, forests, flora and fauna by both the changing conditions and the threats from industrial activity one would think that governments at all levels would all be pulling in the same direction to protect our environment.

We all know of course that this is not true, our Federal Government who should be leading the charge is in fact opening up our natural world to further destruction by reducing both the regulations and the staff that enforce them as well as our scientific experts that study what, why and how these things are happening and what to do about it.

On the other hand the Ontario Provincial Government seems to be going to the opposite extreme. Although they have all but suspended environmental assessments for industrial wind farm installations in their rush to say that they are supporting 'green' initiatives they are going overboard to protect 'wetlands' and other 'habitat'. It seems that now a farmers field that occasionally floods and sees a flock of geese drop in for a rest could be designated a protected wetland.

What follow then are extracts from a couple of articles describing opposite extremes of government actions, somewhere between these two their must be a reasonable level of environmental protection whist still allowing controlled development where necessary. Its a tough balancing act, I will let you decide where that balance lays, for there will be no consensus on this one, nor will we have any meaningful say in trying to find same.

DFO Program & Staff Cuts.
Today all DFO (Department of Fisheries & Oceans - who are / were also responsible for fish habitat in rivers & streams) habitat protection and management staff in Canada are receiving letters that they are now "red-circled" - i.e. they are being affected by Bill C-38 with it's budget and habitat legislation and
program cuts (i.e. DFO downsizing) and many will soon not have a job. Staff were directed to not discuss this with anyone and only DFO Ottawa was allowed to comment on the issue. 132 habitat staff across Canada will be fired (laid off) in the next few months in that many will have to compete for remaining jobs. In the Pacific Region, they now have 92 staff and that is to be reduced to 60 - an approximate 33% cut in staff. Also, all habitat office locations in Pacific Region are to be closed down, with the exception of Whitehorse, Prince Rupert, Kamloops, Vancouver and Nanaimo.

Ottawa has given all DFO habitat staff directions to remove the "Habitat Management Program" title from their organization and from their offices, etc. in that they are now to be called the "Fisheries Protection Program".

All DFO habitat protection offices from Quebec to the BC-Alberta border, i.e. Central and Arctic Region, will also be drastically cut and all offices will be shut down except in Ottawa, Burlington, Winnipeg, Edmonton and Yellowknife. It is indicated that of 63 DFO offices in Canada with habitat staff (now "fisheries protection" staff), most will be closed and the number of offices having habitat-type program staff will be reduced to 14 for a giant geographic area - i.e. Canada.

Ontario Wildlife Protection Zones

The Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources says the changes are just extra criteria to fill gaps in existing wildlife protection rules. They would apply to new developments such as subdivisions, commercial construction or wind turbines, not to smaller projects such as renovating a house.
The scope is broader than anything Ontario has seen before. The draft rules would protect butterflies, toads, salamanders, deer, red spruce, white oak, alvars, sand dunes, bogs, owls, farm fields that flood in the spring, geese, springs, bears, lichens, gulls, turtles, sandpipers, mink, wolves, ospreys, and “dancing grounds” of the sharp-tailed grouse.
These include urban species such as ring-billed gulls (familiar wherever French fries are sold), merlins (a small hawk common in Ottawa) and “nuisance” geese.
More specifically, the following would be designated as Significant Wildlife Habitat:
• Any wetland with 20 or more frogs or tadpoles;
• Large buffer areas around nests of Cooper’s hawks, ring-billed gulls, Canada geese or most ducks, all of which are found in urban Ottawa;
• Farm fields that flood in spring if they are stopovers for 100 or more migrating geese or ducks;
• A single snapping turtle nest, or a pond where five painted turtles spend the winter;
• Any hawk or owl nest in a forest;
• A cliff and the “talus” (fallen rocks) at its base;
• Any stand of trees where 10 per cent or more of the trees are white oak;
• “Corridors” where toads, deer, or salamanders move from spot to spot;
• Any spring or “seep” where groundwater comes to the surface.
In all, the draft outlines habitats of hundreds of types of plants and animals, ranging from forests to beaches to farms and suburbs.
The draft document on Significant Wildlife Habitat was posted on a provincial website in the spring, but attracted little notice. It is on the Environmental Registry website, reference number 011-5740. The period for comments is closed.

---------------

And there you have it, the two extremes from two different levels of government, and both of them IMHO as troubling as the other.

TVO and CBC TV Broadcasts to End

It is reported that “CBC/Radio-Canada is decommissioning its over-the-air analogue television transmission network on July 31, 2012.” and it also seems that TVO Ontario is decommissioning 14 medium and high-powered sites on July 31, the same day that over-the-air broadcasts (OTA) cease for the CBC Television.

The only real surprise here is how quietly this decision has taken place, it seems that the last day to complain to the CRTC is June 18^th but by all accounts it is a done deal anyway so why bother. It is also no suprise that there is no definitive list (from CBC) of the areas that will be left with NO broadcast TV (those that are not within range of a digital signal) which is once again the rural population whose only other option is expensive satellite TV.

"This transmission infrastructure is worth millions and has already been paid for by Canadian taxpayers," says Catherine Edwards of the Canadian Association of Community Television Users and Stations (CACTUS). Rather than being scrapped, communities should be given the chance to maintain it themselves. The transmitters and towers can be used not just to continue free CBC service, but also to set up local wireless Internet, mobile service, or community TV."

In March 2012, TVOntario announced that all 114 of its remaining analog transmitters still under TVOntario ownership will be shut down by October 2013, and will not be replaced by digital transmitters. Its 14 medium and high power transmitters will be shut down July 31, 2012. Of its low power transmitters, 50 will shut down in 2012 and the remaining 50 will shut down in 2013. Remaining broadcasters that carry TVOntario programming has since been transferred to local interests.[12]

• On July 31, 2012 TVO will cease transmission at its 14 medium/high power sites, and then we will begin to decommission those sites.  After July 31, 2012 over-the-air viewers in the following communities can receive TVO by subscribing to a local television service provider:
   
  

Bancroft	channel 42
Hawkesbury	channel 48
Huntsville	channel 13
Kenora	channel 44
Kingston	channel 38
North Bay	channel 6
Owen Sound	channel 12
Parry Sound	channel 42
Pembroke	channel 29
Penetanguishene	channel 51
Peterborough	channel 18
Sault Ste. Marie	channel 20
Sudbury	channel 19
Timmins	channel 7

On August 18, 2011, the CRTC issued a decision that allows CBC's mandatory market rebroadcasting transmitters in analog to remain on-air until August 31, 2012.[55] Before that deadline, CBC's license renewal process will take place and CBC's digital transition plans will be examined as part of that process. The requirement remains for all of CBC's full power transmitters occupying channels 52 to 69 to either relocate to channels 2 to 51 or become low power transmitters. In some cases, CBC has opted to reduce the power of existing transmitters to low power transmitters, which will result in signal loss for some viewers.
On April 4, 2012, CBC released its budget plans, in which it announced that all of its approximately 620 analog television transmitters will be shut down on July 31, 2012, which is early than planned, due to funding reductions from the federal government.[56][57]

Once again us rural folks get screwed and treated as a second class citizen because we are a minority. In many of the locations, including it would seem the Grey Bruce area, the broadcasts will not be replaced by digital signals but simply shut down, period. As I said above that leaves but one choice for many of us – satellite TV. If anyone thinks I am going to pay $50 a month to watch an ever increasing load of crap they are sadly mistaken. I will miss TVO though, particularly Steve Pakin's “The Agenda”.

Also see my earlier posts on this subject here, here and here

NOTE:- Although Industry Canada has allocated a digital frequency for use by these stations there appears to be no applications for actually providing a digital signal in these largely rural areas. It is interesting to note that most digital transmitters of TV stations are located in urban areas where relatively inexpensive access to television via cable is available whilst in more remote rural areas where cable is rarely available there is now no access to a signal by either analog OR digital signals!