Eco-Eye on the OlympicsGuard Fox Watch (GFW) is sponsored by Planet Drum Foundation.GFW prepared a thorough list of ecologically sustainable practices to carry out before, during and after the Winter Olympics that covers: NATIVE SPECIES HABITAT AND OTHER NATURAL FEATURES / WATER / SEWAGE / FOOD / WASTES / TRANSPORTATION / MATERIALS / EMPLOYMENT. Most of these were dismissed as "not feasible" or addressed in only a minimal, foot-dragging way by Olympic Committees. Before the Salt Lake City (2002) Olympics, a major story based on our findings broke in the Los Angeles Times, Washington Post, and other major newspapers. Since then Guard Fox Watch has actively worked with concerned local citizens before the 2006 (Turin, Italy) and 2010 (Vancouver, Canada) Games. In preparation for the 2014 Games (Sochi, Russia), local citizen activists corresponded with GFW and examined articles on this website for guidance. GFW recommendations have influenced the UN Environment Program to criticize the lack of wildlife and habitat policies at Sochi. Index of Articles for Bioregional Olympians2014 Sochi, RussiaAlready there are concerns about the ecological impacts of The 2014 winter Olympic games. Links to articles are: UN criticizes Russia over Sochi Winter Olympics , Winter Olympics threatened by Bad Planning , Putin Faces Green Olympic Challenge . 2010 Vancouver, CanadaThe upcoming 2010 Winter Olympic Games in Vancouver, Canada neglect to monitor
ongoing environmental impact: VANOC will violate International Olympic Committee mandate for
ecological sustainability according to
the international ecological monitoring group Guard Fox Watch. This press
release details the dismal state of
environmental safeguards for 2010 Winter
Olympic Games in Vancouver, BC, Canada. 2006 Turin, ItalyWinter Olympics Won't Avoid Environmental Damage (March 2004) Bioregional Impacts, Ecological Implications, and Recommendations for Olympic Winter Games is the latest summarized overview from Guard Fox Watch. (October 2003) Bioregional Impacts, Ecological Implications,
and Recommendations - Impatto Bioregionale, Implicazioni Ecologiche E Raccomandazioni Per I Giochi Olimpici Invernali Del 2006 A Torino — Italia (August 2003). Italian language version of GFW Report August 2003. 2002 Salt Lake City, USAWhy Take on the Winter Olympics, and What Came of the Effort? by Peter Berg (February 2002) OLYMPICS; Greenest Games Ever? Not! by Martin A. Lee (February 2002) Help Stop The Greenwashing Of The Winter Olympics! (December 2002) Roots of Action Date to Nagano Olympics Environmental Recommendations Go Unheeded by Salt Lake City Olympics Organizers Th is is a wrap-up about actions surrounding the Salt Lake Olympics (2002) with references to the related Background Documents. Nobody Wins If Nature Loses by Martin A. Lee (Summer 2001) Background documentation for 2002 Winter Olympics 1998 Nagano JapanGuard Fox Watch Communiques 1998
<<<<====>>>>Call to Action:Help Stop The Greenwashing Of The Winter Olympics!Make The 2002 Games In Salt Lake City Ecologically Sustainable!The 2002 Winter Olympic Games in Salt Lake City, Utah represent a precedent-making opportunity to transform one of the most popular sports events on the planet into a model of environmental sensitivity and sustainability. Many of these competitions are outdoors and have direct impacts on natural surroundings. They have a worldwide following, and serve as a standard for other outdoor sports spectacles. The Winter Olympics should stand up to the responsibility and potential for creating beneficial ecological changes. The last Winter Games in Nagano, Japan were not only notoriously destructive to the environment, they were also "greenwashed" for the media and general public. Plastic and paper waste supposedly gathered for recycling was actually burned in smog-producing local electricity generating plants. Five times the normal amount of snow- melting chemicals ran off roads into streams and rice fields. Thousands of vehicles turned snow banks black and filled the air with exhaust fumes. Trees were clear-cut for ski runs and native snow monkeys and birds were run off. Local water, sewage, electrical, and waste systems were overwhelmed. Guard Fox Watch (GFW), a Japan-USA organization which monitored and reported on horrendous environmental conditions during the Nagano Games, visited Salt Lake City sites and prepared a list of ways to measure impacts in 2002. The Salt Lake Organizing Committee (SLOC) told the media "We’re planning to improve environmental conditions, not just keep them the same", but refused to carry out the studies we recommended that could verify this claim. We don’t want another Nagano "greenwashing"! We can still make SLOC environmentally responsible. GFW prepared a thorough list of ecologically sustainable practices to carry out before, during and after the Winter Olympics that covers: NATIVE SPECIES HABITAT AND OTHER NATURAL FEATURES / WATER / SEWAGE / FOOD / WASTES / TRANSPORTATION / MATERIALS / EMPLOYMENT. Most of these were also dismissed as "not feasible" or addressed in only a minimal, foot-dragging way. Put Guard Fox Watch's safeguards and sustainable practices in place before the Winter Games begin. Join a widely diverse international group of endorsing environmental leaders including:
Act Now Before It's Too Late!
Sign and send this message to: SLOC/ 299 South Main Street/ Suite 1300/ PO Box 45002/ Salt Lake City UT 84145-0002/ USA. FAX (801) 364-7644.
I urge you to adopt Guard Fox Watch's program to prevent destructive environmental impacts and create a model of ecological sustainability at the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City. There is still time if you start undertaking those recommendations immediately.
<<<<====>>>>Why Take on the Winter Olympics, and What Came of the Effort?By Peter Berg
|
|
"[Peter] Berg homes in on the example of the Nagano Winter Olympic Games to illustrate how a bioregional way of thinking would bring benefits to the community. He describes the Olympic Games as a facet of global monoculture, similar to McDonalds, Coca Cola, et al., which have no relationship to the place they go, and, since the media advertisers and land developers make their profits irrespective of future land use, leave only waste and abandoned stadiums in their wake. Aside from the estimated Olympian burden of $30,000 per Nagano City taxpayer over the next 20 years to pay for the party, Peter highlights the damage to natural systems: watersheds suffer chemical pollution from snow-bonded auto exhaust and overuse of highway salts. Soil erosion from 115 km of newly built roads in the geologically sensitive Nagano mountains is acute.Native plant and animal communities are disrupted by both habitat destruction due to building and crowd noise during their most difficult survival season. He gives a first hand account of the 87 metric tons of extra Olympic garbage being incinerated and the increased auto pollution which now sully the air at Hakuba. With a bioregional approach to planning the Games, the organizers could have, for instance, developed solar, wind, and hot spring steam power sources to generate the required extra electricity, thus building sustainable facilities which would remain to benefit the region. A few well-devised policies to subsidize and create genuine and thorough recycling programs would help provide new long-term employment and wealth for the area, and Berg laments the lost opportunity with the words "The real loss of the Games is to Nagano." The Guard Fox Watch slogan sums it up: "Nobody wins the Games if Nature loses!"—Renate Suzuki, "Peter Berg's Olympic Message," Japan Environment Monitor, Feb/Mar, 1998. |