Just Stop Oil: Nonviolent Protests Get Record Sentences
Release Date: 07/26/2024
What Happens to Fish When Our Pills Reach the Water?
How To Protect The Ocean
In 2001, government scientists started adding a tiny amount of the synthetic estrogen found in birth control pills to a remote lake in northwestern Ontario, at levels already measured in city wastewater. Within seven weeks, male fish were making egg-yolk protein. After two summers, some had eggs growing in their testes, and the fathead minnow population collapsed to about 1% of normal. Andrew explains how the same chemistry leaves our bodies every day, passes through treatment plants built for sewage and bacteria, and flows into rivers, lakes, and the coast. Hormones are only part of it. In...
info_outline
How Did Humpback Whales End Up in New York Harbour?
How To Protect The Ocean
This summer, people are boarding whale watching boats and seeing humpbacks feeding in sight of the Manhattan skyline. Fifty years ago, that same water was an open sewer, and every toilet on Manhattan's West Side flushed straight into the Hudson River, untreated. Andrew tells the story of how the whales got here, and why it took most of a century. He starts with the cause: sewers built to empty into the rivers, roughly 590 million gallons of raw sewage a day by the early 1900s, and floating screens at Coney Island to keep it away from swimmers. Then the turn. The city began testing the harbor...
info_outline
Plastic Is Still the Ocean's #1 Villain, with Dr. Judith Weis
How To Protect The Ocean
Plastic keeps getting made, it never goes away, and almost none of it gets recycled. Dr. Judith Weis, Professor Emerita at Rutgers University Newark and Andrew's very first guest on this podcast more than 2,000 episodes ago, returns for her fourth appearance to talk about the second edition of her book, Marine Pollution: What Everyone Needs to Know. Judith walks through every major category of marine pollution: nutrients, metals, oil, pesticides, marine debris, pharmaceuticals, ocean acidification, and one category that surprises most people, biological pollution. She explains why...
info_outline
You Left a Public Comment. Now What?
How To Protect The Ocean
All week, Andrew has asked listeners to comment on and show up for California's marine protected area review. Today he answers the question that comes after: once the meeting ends and the news coverage stops, how do you find out if anything actually changed? He works through four practical questions every ocean advocate should know how to answer. First, where to find the current rules for any of the 124 MPAs in California's network (the California Department of Fish and Wildlife's own MPA pages). Second, why a Fish and Game Commission vote isn't the finish line, since approved changes still go...
info_outline
Does Your Public Comment Count? Two Ocean Wins Show How
How To Protect The Ocean
Earlier this year, about 65,000 people submitted comments on a federal deep-sea mining proposal near the Northern Mariana Islands, most of them opposed. The area under consideration nearly doubled anyway. So why should anyone show up to a public meeting about the ocean? Andrew Lewin makes the case with two marine protected area processes that earned broad public support by design. The first is the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park's Representative Areas Program, which rezoned the entire park between 1999 and 2004. Two formal community participation phases, one before any draft existed, drew more...
info_outline
The Blob Hit California's Kelp. Protected Kelp Came Back Faster.
How To Protect The Ocean
In 2014, just two years after California finished its statewide network of marine protected areas, a marine heatwave known as The Blob settled over the Pacific coast and stayed for two years. Kelp forests collapsed up and down the state, and sea star wasting disease wiped out sea stars on a scale few scientists had seen. For a network built partly to protect kelp habitat, it was the worst possible first test. Andrew Lewin walks through what the state learned when it checked. California's first Decadal Management Review pulled together long-term monitoring across kelp forests, rocky reefs, the...
info_outline
300 People, 50 Tribes, One Meeting: How California Built Its Marine Protected Areas
How To Protect The Ocean
In 1999, California passed a law ordering the state to fix its patchwork of ocean parks. For two years, almost nothing happened, and two attempts to get the process moving both failed. It took a 2004 public-private partnership, roughly $35 million in public and philanthropic funding, and a decade of work before the state had a real network of marine protected areas. Partway through that decade, more than 300 people from over 50 tribal nations walked into a public meeting in Fort Bragg to protest how the process was treating their rights. Andrew Lewin walks through what actually happened...
info_outline
California Votes on 15 MPA Changes in October. Who Got a Say?
How To Protect The Ocean
California has a network of 124 marine protected areas, and in October the state's Fish and Game Commission takes up 15 proposals that could change it. The proposals came out of the network's first 10-year management review, an adaptive management process written into the law so the network could respond to shifting fish populations, a warming climate, and evolving public values. Anupa Asokan, founder of Fish On, explains what that review looked like from inside the room. Anupa is a marine scientist, angler, and surfer who started Fish On to give conservation-minded anglers and spearfishers a...
info_outline
Millimeters That Matter: The Sea Level Rise Threshold Coastal Wetlands Can't Survive
How To Protect The Ocean
Sea level rise. It's a phrase everyone's supposed to be afraid of, and almost nobody can picture. A couple of millimeters a year sounds too small to matter, until you find out coastal wetlands have an exact, measured speed limit for how fast they can keep up, and the ocean is closing in on it. Marshes and mangroves have kept pace with a rising sea for thousands of years by building their own soil upward, layer by layer, as plants grow, die, and get buried in place. That strategy has a hard limit. Peer-reviewed research puts it at roughly 6.1 millimeters of sea level rise a year, the point past...
info_outline
What the Coast Is Worth: How a Dollar Number Is Already Funding Its Protection
How To Protect The Ocean
A boat's wake looks harmless right up until you watch it happen over and over. Every wake a boat throws off chips away at a shoreline that took centuries to build, and it happens on calm days, sunny days, days with no storm anywhere near. A NOAA study at Snow's Cut, North Carolina found that roughly half of all boat wake heights on that stretch of the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway exceeded the largest wind driven waves measured there, and boats moving at the slow, considerate seeming "plowing" speed threw the tallest wakes of all. Habitat pushes back, and now that push has a number attached...
info_outlineThis episode of the How to Protect the Ocean podcast explores the extreme lengths some individuals are willing to go to protest climate change, including risking up to five years in jail. The host, Andrew Lewin, discusses the Just Stop Oil campaign in the UK, where activists are facing lengthy sentences for their advocacy. The episode raises questions about the future of activism and the potential consequences individuals may face for fighting against environmental harm. Additionally, Andrew mentions recent video podcasting initiatives and encourages listeners to engage with the content in both audio and video formats.
Sign Up for Updates on the process: www.speakupforblue.com/oceanapp
Connect with Speak Up For Blue:
Website: https://bit.ly/3fOF3Wf
Instagram: https://bit.ly/3rIaJSG
TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@speakupforblue
Twitter: https://bit.ly/3rHZxpc
YouTube: www.speakupforblue.com/youtube
The podcast episode delves into the legal challenges faced by activists in the UK who received four to five-year sentences for their involvement in protesting oil exploration as part of the Just Stop Oil campaign. The activists were found guilty of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance for organizing direct action protests on the M25 over four days in November 2022. One activist received a five-year sentence, while four others received four-year sentences each, marking the longest sentences ever given in the UK for nonviolent protests.
The Just Stop Oil campaign aims to pressure the government to reconsider its support for oil exploration in the North Sea by oil companies. The activists engaged in various forms of protest, including disrupting traffic on major highways and participating in extreme actions like slowing down F1 races. While these actions were intended to raise awareness about climate change and oil exploration, they also resulted in legal consequences for the activists involved.
The episode sheds light on the dilemma faced by activists who are willing to take extreme measures to advocate for environmental causes. It raises questions about the effectiveness of such protests, the risks involved, and the potential consequences for individuals who choose to participate. The activists' willingness to accept lengthy sentences for their beliefs underscores the depth of their commitment to environmental activism and the urgency they feel in addressing climate change issues.
Overall, the episode highlights the challenges and sacrifices that activists may encounter in their efforts to bring about change and protect the environment. It prompts reflection on the balance between activism, legal consequences, and the pursuit of environmental conservation goals.
The activists involved in the Just Stop Oil campaign in the UK were found guilty of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance for coordinating direct action protests on the M25 highway. Roger Hellam, Daniel Shaw, Louise Lancaster, Lucia Whittaker-Debreu, and Christina Gethin were convicted for their involvement in protests that disrupted the M25 over four days in November 2022.
Their actions led to record sentences, with Roger Hellam receiving a five-year sentence and the other four activists each receiving a four-year sentence. These sentences are the longest ever given in the UK for nonviolent protests, surpassing previous cases related to environmental activism.
The activists aimed to draw attention to the government's stance on oil exploration in the North Sea and the subsidies provided to oil companies. By disrupting major transportation routes like the M25, they sought to raise awareness about the environmental impact of continued oil drilling and its contribution to climate change through greenhouse gas emissions.
While the activists believed their protests were necessary to prompt government action on climate change, the legal system viewed their actions as a public nuisance deserving significant penalties. The court's decision to impose lengthy sentences reflects the seriousness with which such disruptions are treated under the law.
The case highlights the complex dynamics between activism, environmental advocacy, and legal consequences. It raises questions about the boundaries of protest actions, the balance between civil disobedience and public safety, and the potential sacrifices individuals are willing to make for their cause. The activists' conviction serves as a cautionary tale for those considering engaging in similar forms of protest and underscores the challenges and risks associated with advocating for environmental change through direct action.
Environmental advocacy often involves individuals taking extreme actions to draw attention to pressing issues such as climate change and pollution. The podcast episode highlighted that some activists in the UK associated with the Just Stop Oil campaign faced legal repercussions for their protests. These activists were sentenced to four to five years in jail for their actions, marking one of the longest sentences ever given in the UK for nonviolent protests.
The episode emphasized the importance of considering the consequences and sacrifices involved in advocating for environmental causes. While the activists believed that their extreme actions were necessary to prompt government action on oil exploration in the North Sea, they ultimately faced severe legal consequences. This serves as a stark reminder that engaging in disruptive protests or actions can lead to significant personal sacrifices, including time away from families, careers, and freedom.
The podcast highlighted the dilemma faced by activists who feel compelled to take drastic measures to bring attention to urgent environmental issues. While their intentions may be noble, it is crucial to weigh the potential legal repercussions and societal impact of such actions. The activists' willingness to endure legal consequences for their cause underscores the depth of their commitment to environmental protection.
Ultimately, the episode underscored the complexity of environmental advocacy and the need for individuals to carefully consider the implications of their actions. While passion and dedication are essential in driving change, it is vital to assess the potential risks and sacrifices involved in advocating for environmental causes, especially when considering extreme measures that may lead to legal repercussions.