Farmworker Awareness Week last week united hundreds of farmworkers and worker-rights advocates seeking stronger protections for the people who grow and harvest the food we eat every day.

But as the week drew to a close, the EPA announced that it will do next to nothing to further protect farmworkers and their families from chlorpyrifos, a neurotoxic pesticide that is one of the top culprits in pesticide poisonings every year.

We call chlorpyrifos ‘CPR’ because 1) CPR is shorter to type, and 2) CPR is what you might need if you ever had the bad luck to breathe it.

On March 26, the EPA stated that despite dozens of peer-reviewed academic studies demonstrating that CPR causes damage to the developing brains of unborn children at far lower doses than the EPA’s regulations allow, it will not ban CPR across the board.

Its secondary conclusion, that it may seek some future undisclosed mitigation for admittedly unacceptable risks to workers, is far too little, too late.

Dow feigns indignation at its knock-out victory

Dow AgroSciences, the major CPR manufacturer, is apoplectic, spluttering away about over-regulation. This reaction is a sham. The EPA has agreed to use a Dow model that purports to pinpoint the precise exposures to women and kids that will cause adverse effects.

Despite the model’s numerous flaws and uncertainties, and the obvious conflict of interest, Dow has convinced the EPA that this one model has the precision and accuracy necessary to reduce safety precautions routinely employed to protect people from toxic pesticides.

The EPA’s elimination of protection is unconscionable. First, the Dow model would allow children to be exposed to amounts of CPR that could cause brain damage: it is only designed to prevent higher doses associated with acute poisonings in adults.

Second, the Dow model is based on the intentional dosing of people in a study that the EPA’s ethics expert found ethically deficient, and the EPA’s scientific peer reviewers found that it lacked scientific credibility.

Tiny ‘no-spray’ zones, no protection for farmworker families

To be sure, the EPA finally established no-spray zones around schools, homes, hospitals and playfields. But the no-spray zones are tiny – only 10 feet wide for most applications. The reason? The EPA ignores direct exposure to pesticide drift.

While the no-spray zones are designed to reduce exposure when people reach out and touch crops that have been sprayed, poisoning by coming into contact with pesticides wafting through the air happens with alarming frequency. In fact, most reported poisonings in Washington state are from direct drift.

The EPA should be ashamed. CPR impairs brain development in children and causes acute poisonings. People are exposed when they eat foods, drink contaminated water, work in fields, play in parks or go to school playgrounds where CPR drifts.

In 2000, all homeowner uses of CPR stopped because of its alarming health effects on children who played on pesticide-treated carpets or hugged their pets wearing flea collars. But these measures left farmworker children and their communities unprotected.

Are court orders the only message the EPA understands?

In 2007, Pesticide Action Network and Natural Resource Defense Council petitioned the EPA to ban CPR because the agency failed to account for pesticide drift or the growing body of peer-reviewed studies from such reputable institutions as Columbia University, Mt. Sinai Hospital, and UC-Berkeley that found children exposed to CPR in utero had serious brain impairments, including lower IQs, autism and attention deficit disorder.

The EPA did nothing with the petition until we filed suit, and forward progress has come only when the EPA had to answer to a court. Indeed, in our current lawsuit, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals announced a date for oral argument on the same day the EPA released its CPR decision.

The EPA’s job is to protect people from toxic pesticides, but it’s not. On behalf of all farmworkers who find themselves in harm’s way, the EPA must take steps to prevent poisonings from pesticide spraying.

On behalf of the children and their parents, the EPA must do more to protect against brain damage caused by this dangerous pesticide. Chlorpyrifos should be banned, period.

Petition: ‘Urge EPA to ban widely used toxic pesticide‘.

Patti Goldman is a managing attorney of EarthJustice‘s Northwest regional office in Seattle, where she works to fight efforts to turn the Pacific Northwest into a fossil fuel export hub. She also leads Earthjustice’s pesticide work and efforts to preserve access to the courts and legal remedies. Her litigation experience includes notable successes in safeguarding the region’s old-growth forests, restoring Pacific salmon, and more.

Also on The Ecologist: ‘Chlorpyrifos – cause of birth defects, mental impairment – sprayed on farms across the US‘ by Janette D. Sherman.

This article was originally published by EarthJustice.

The Guardian Media Group (GMG), which owns the Guardian and Observer newspapers, has decided to divest its entire investment fund, estimated to be worth over £800m, of fossil fuel assets.

But the divestment will not be total, warned Neil Berkett, GMG chair. Coal would be the first in the firing line, while natural gas assets appeared to be exempt from the planned sell-off – potentially including investments in the highly controversial process of ‘fracking’ for gas:

“We cannot divest unilaterally from all segments that might contribute, one way or another, to climate change. Some hydrocarbons, particularly natural gas, will remain vital for energy needs in the medium term. But a transition to cleaner energy will allow us to make a firm stand on the worst offenders: coal-based fossil fuels.”

Berkett also warned that the sell-off of fossil fuel assets “will not happen overnight”, blaming inflexibility in the financial system. “A fundamental issue is that fund managers operate co-mingled funds and cannot (or will not) screen out fossil fuel securities within them”, he explained.

“Currently there is a scarcity of high-quality managers that offer non-fossil fuel options. Of the 17,400 public equity managers, fixed income managers and diversifiers in the institutional quality manager ‘universe’, only a few dozen are fossil free in their asset allocation. This means that it will take time and require flexibility to divest gradually from fossil fuel companies.”

He estimates that GMG’s fossil fuel holdings are currently in low single digit percentage points. Direct holdings of fossil stocks and bonds would be sold off within two years, while ‘co-mingled’ funds would be divested over a longer five year period.

Guardian divestment campaign

The decision to divest was probably inevitable to avoid charges of hypocrisy given the Guardian‘s strong campaigning stance on fossil fuels. Its ‘Keep it in the Ground campaign‘ is calling on the world’s two biggest charitable funds – the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Wellcome Trust – to entirely divest their endowments from fossil fuels. The petition has so far been signed by over 145,000 readers.

Bill McKibben of 350.org, a leader of the global divestment movement, welcomed the decision: “The Guardian understands there’s an argument and a fight about climate change. The argument – as its reporters have chronicled – we have long since won; everyone knows by now the planet is in peril. But the fight with the fossil fuel industry has become a pitched battle, and now the Guardian lends its weight here as well.”

The Guardian is following where over 180 organizations have led, including Syracuse University, which yesterday committed to divest its $1.18bn (£799m) endowment and the UK’s Glasgow University. Last year the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, valued at $860m (£582m) also committed to divest, while Norway’s sovereign wealth fund, the largest in the world, divested from coal companies.

The Guardian’s editor-in-chief Alan Rusbridger said: “I’m really delighted that GMG, having independently considered all the evidence, has decided to divest out of fossil fuels. What was a trickle is becoming a river and will, I suspect, become a flood. I’m glad that GMG is ahead of the trend – and believe this decision will be strongly influential on other companies and foundations.”

Driven by ‘good business sense‘

Berkett made it clear that the decision was motivated primarily by commercial considerations: “We are not doing this because it makes good headlines. We are doing it because it makes good business sense … it became clear that GMG can prudently work towards allocating more funds to socially responsible investments without jeopardising our overall returns.”

Oil and coal investments had already fallen, he explained, and probably had further to go: “The returns from fossil fuel companies could be further compromised, fully justifying divestment, as it becomes clear that many of their resource reserves are over-valued.”

With the UNFCCC estimating that proven fossil fuel reserves are more than four times greater than what can safely be burnt, he added, “sooner or later, fund managers should begin to discount the potential returns from such companies, and reconsider their exposure to them.

“At the same time, we anticipate rising demand for renewables – and the technologies that supply them – opening up an alternative sector in which to invest.” The FTSE Environmental Technology 50 Index had returned 6.9% annually over the last ten years, he pointed out, “producing superior absolute and risk-adjusted returns to commodity futures.”

“Already, one of GMG’s largest active holdings is with a manager that puts environmental, social and governance issues at the core of its principles. It has been a stellar performer, which gives us confidence that this is the right course of action for the rest of the portfolio. We aim to increase such holdings significantly over the next two years.”

Farmworker Awareness Week last week united hundreds of farmworkers and worker-rights advocates seeking stronger protections for the people who grow and harvest the food we eat every day.

But as the week drew to a close, the EPA announced that it will do next to nothing to further protect farmworkers and their families from chlorpyrifos, a neurotoxic pesticide that is one of the top culprits in pesticide poisonings every year.

We call chlorpyrifos ‘CPR’ because 1) CPR is shorter to type, and 2) CPR is what you might need if you ever had the bad luck to breathe it.

On March 26, the EPA stated that despite dozens of peer-reviewed academic studies demonstrating that CPR causes damage to the developing brains of unborn children at far lower doses than the EPA’s regulations allow, it will not ban CPR across the board.

Its secondary conclusion, that it may seek some future undisclosed mitigation for admittedly unacceptable risks to workers, is far too little, too late.

Dow feigns indignation at its knock-out victory

Dow AgroSciences, the major CPR manufacturer, is apoplectic, spluttering away about over-regulation. This reaction is a sham. The EPA has agreed to use a Dow model that purports to pinpoint the precise exposures to women and kids that will cause adverse effects.

Despite the model’s numerous flaws and uncertainties, and the obvious conflict of interest, Dow has convinced the EPA that this one model has the precision and accuracy necessary to reduce safety precautions routinely employed to protect people from toxic pesticides.

The EPA’s elimination of protection is unconscionable. First, the Dow model would allow children to be exposed to amounts of CPR that could cause brain damage: it is only designed to prevent higher doses associated with acute poisonings in adults.

Second, the Dow model is based on the intentional dosing of people in a study that the EPA’s ethics expert found ethically deficient, and the EPA’s scientific peer reviewers found that it lacked scientific credibility.

Tiny ‘no-spray’ zones, no protection for farmworker families

To be sure, the EPA finally established no-spray zones around schools, homes, hospitals and playfields. But the no-spray zones are tiny – only 10 feet wide for most applications. The reason? The EPA ignores direct exposure to pesticide drift.

While the no-spray zones are designed to reduce exposure when people reach out and touch crops that have been sprayed, poisoning by coming into contact with pesticides wafting through the air happens with alarming frequency. In fact, most reported poisonings in Washington state are from direct drift.

The EPA should be ashamed. CPR impairs brain development in children and causes acute poisonings. People are exposed when they eat foods, drink contaminated water, work in fields, play in parks or go to school playgrounds where CPR drifts.

In 2000, all homeowner uses of CPR stopped because of its alarming health effects on children who played on pesticide-treated carpets or hugged their pets wearing flea collars. But these measures left farmworker children and their communities unprotected.

Are court orders the only message the EPA understands?

In 2007, Pesticide Action Network and Natural Resource Defense Council petitioned the EPA to ban CPR because the agency failed to account for pesticide drift or the growing body of peer-reviewed studies from such reputable institutions as Columbia University, Mt. Sinai Hospital, and UC-Berkeley that found children exposed to CPR in utero had serious brain impairments, including lower IQs, autism and attention deficit disorder.

The EPA did nothing with the petition until we filed suit, and forward progress has come only when the EPA had to answer to a court. Indeed, in our current lawsuit, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals announced a date for oral argument on the same day the EPA released its CPR decision.

The EPA’s job is to protect people from toxic pesticides, but it’s not. On behalf of all farmworkers who find themselves in harm’s way, the EPA must take steps to prevent poisonings from pesticide spraying.

On behalf of the children and their parents, the EPA must do more to protect against brain damage caused by this dangerous pesticide. Chlorpyrifos should be banned, period.

Petition: ‘Urge EPA to ban widely used toxic pesticide‘.

Patti Goldman is a managing attorney of EarthJustice‘s Northwest regional office in Seattle, where she works to fight efforts to turn the Pacific Northwest into a fossil fuel export hub. She also leads Earthjustice’s pesticide work and efforts to preserve access to the courts and legal remedies. Her litigation experience includes notable successes in safeguarding the region’s old-growth forests, restoring Pacific salmon, and more.

Also on The Ecologist: ‘Chlorpyrifos – cause of birth defects, mental impairment – sprayed on farms across the US‘ by Janette D. Sherman.

This article was originally published by EarthJustice.

The Guardian Media Group (GMG), which owns the Guardian and Observer newspapers, has decided to divest its entire investment fund, estimated to be worth over £800m, of fossil fuel assets.

But the divestment will not be total, warned Neil Berkett, GMG chair. Coal would be the first in the firing line, while natural gas assets appeared to be exempt from the planned sell-off – potentially including investments in the highly controversial process of ‘fracking’ for gas:

“We cannot divest unilaterally from all segments that might contribute, one way or another, to climate change. Some hydrocarbons, particularly natural gas, will remain vital for energy needs in the medium term. But a transition to cleaner energy will allow us to make a firm stand on the worst offenders: coal-based fossil fuels.”

Berkett also warned that the sell-off of fossil fuel assets “will not happen overnight”, blaming inflexibility in the financial system. “A fundamental issue is that fund managers operate co-mingled funds and cannot (or will not) screen out fossil fuel securities within them”, he explained.

“Currently there is a scarcity of high-quality managers that offer non-fossil fuel options. Of the 17,400 public equity managers, fixed income managers and diversifiers in the institutional quality manager ‘universe’, only a few dozen are fossil free in their asset allocation. This means that it will take time and require flexibility to divest gradually from fossil fuel companies.”

He estimates that GMG’s fossil fuel holdings are currently in low single digit percentage points. Direct holdings of fossil stocks and bonds would be sold off within two years, while ‘co-mingled’ funds would be divested over a longer five year period.

Guardian divestment campaign

The decision to divest was probably inevitable to avoid charges of hypocrisy given the Guardian‘s strong campaigning stance on fossil fuels. Its ‘Keep it in the Ground campaign‘ is calling on the world’s two biggest charitable funds – the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Wellcome Trust – to entirely divest their endowments from fossil fuels. The petition has so far been signed by over 145,000 readers.

Bill McKibben of 350.org, a leader of the global divestment movement, welcomed the decision: “The Guardian understands there’s an argument and a fight about climate change. The argument – as its reporters have chronicled – we have long since won; everyone knows by now the planet is in peril. But the fight with the fossil fuel industry has become a pitched battle, and now the Guardian lends its weight here as well.”

The Guardian is following where over 180 organizations have led, including Syracuse University, which yesterday committed to divest its $1.18bn (£799m) endowment and the UK’s Glasgow University. Last year the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, valued at $860m (£582m) also committed to divest, while Norway’s sovereign wealth fund, the largest in the world, divested from coal companies.

The Guardian’s editor-in-chief Alan Rusbridger said: “I’m really delighted that GMG, having independently considered all the evidence, has decided to divest out of fossil fuels. What was a trickle is becoming a river and will, I suspect, become a flood. I’m glad that GMG is ahead of the trend – and believe this decision will be strongly influential on other companies and foundations.”

Driven by ‘good business sense‘

Berkett made it clear that the decision was motivated primarily by commercial considerations: “We are not doing this because it makes good headlines. We are doing it because it makes good business sense … it became clear that GMG can prudently work towards allocating more funds to socially responsible investments without jeopardising our overall returns.”

Oil and coal investments had already fallen, he explained, and probably had further to go: “The returns from fossil fuel companies could be further compromised, fully justifying divestment, as it becomes clear that many of their resource reserves are over-valued.”

With the UNFCCC estimating that proven fossil fuel reserves are more than four times greater than what can safely be burnt, he added, “sooner or later, fund managers should begin to discount the potential returns from such companies, and reconsider their exposure to them.

“At the same time, we anticipate rising demand for renewables – and the technologies that supply them – opening up an alternative sector in which to invest.” The FTSE Environmental Technology 50 Index had returned 6.9% annually over the last ten years, he pointed out, “producing superior absolute and risk-adjusted returns to commodity futures.”

“Already, one of GMG’s largest active holdings is with a manager that puts environmental, social and governance issues at the core of its principles. It has been a stellar performer, which gives us confidence that this is the right course of action for the rest of the portfolio. We aim to increase such holdings significantly over the next two years.”

Farmworker Awareness Week last week united hundreds of farmworkers and worker-rights advocates seeking stronger protections for the people who grow and harvest the food we eat every day.

But as the week drew to a close, the EPA announced that it will do next to nothing to further protect farmworkers and their families from chlorpyrifos, a neurotoxic pesticide that is one of the top culprits in pesticide poisonings every year.

We call chlorpyrifos ‘CPR’ because 1) CPR is shorter to type, and 2) CPR is what you might need if you ever had the bad luck to breathe it.

On March 26, the EPA stated that despite dozens of peer-reviewed academic studies demonstrating that CPR causes damage to the developing brains of unborn children at far lower doses than the EPA’s regulations allow, it will not ban CPR across the board.

Its secondary conclusion, that it may seek some future undisclosed mitigation for admittedly unacceptable risks to workers, is far too little, too late.

Dow feigns indignation at its knock-out victory

Dow AgroSciences, the major CPR manufacturer, is apoplectic, spluttering away about over-regulation. This reaction is a sham. The EPA has agreed to use a Dow model that purports to pinpoint the precise exposures to women and kids that will cause adverse effects.

Despite the model’s numerous flaws and uncertainties, and the obvious conflict of interest, Dow has convinced the EPA that this one model has the precision and accuracy necessary to reduce safety precautions routinely employed to protect people from toxic pesticides.

The EPA’s elimination of protection is unconscionable. First, the Dow model would allow children to be exposed to amounts of CPR that could cause brain damage: it is only designed to prevent higher doses associated with acute poisonings in adults.

Second, the Dow model is based on the intentional dosing of people in a study that the EPA’s ethics expert found ethically deficient, and the EPA’s scientific peer reviewers found that it lacked scientific credibility.

Tiny ‘no-spray’ zones, no protection for farmworker families

To be sure, the EPA finally established no-spray zones around schools, homes, hospitals and playfields. But the no-spray zones are tiny – only 10 feet wide for most applications. The reason? The EPA ignores direct exposure to pesticide drift.

While the no-spray zones are designed to reduce exposure when people reach out and touch crops that have been sprayed, poisoning by coming into contact with pesticides wafting through the air happens with alarming frequency. In fact, most reported poisonings in Washington state are from direct drift.

The EPA should be ashamed. CPR impairs brain development in children and causes acute poisonings. People are exposed when they eat foods, drink contaminated water, work in fields, play in parks or go to school playgrounds where CPR drifts.

In 2000, all homeowner uses of CPR stopped because of its alarming health effects on children who played on pesticide-treated carpets or hugged their pets wearing flea collars. But these measures left farmworker children and their communities unprotected.

Are court orders the only message the EPA understands?

In 2007, Pesticide Action Network and Natural Resource Defense Council petitioned the EPA to ban CPR because the agency failed to account for pesticide drift or the growing body of peer-reviewed studies from such reputable institutions as Columbia University, Mt. Sinai Hospital, and UC-Berkeley that found children exposed to CPR in utero had serious brain impairments, including lower IQs, autism and attention deficit disorder.

The EPA did nothing with the petition until we filed suit, and forward progress has come only when the EPA had to answer to a court. Indeed, in our current lawsuit, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals announced a date for oral argument on the same day the EPA released its CPR decision.

The EPA’s job is to protect people from toxic pesticides, but it’s not. On behalf of all farmworkers who find themselves in harm’s way, the EPA must take steps to prevent poisonings from pesticide spraying.

On behalf of the children and their parents, the EPA must do more to protect against brain damage caused by this dangerous pesticide. Chlorpyrifos should be banned, period.

Petition: ‘Urge EPA to ban widely used toxic pesticide‘.

Patti Goldman is a managing attorney of EarthJustice‘s Northwest regional office in Seattle, where she works to fight efforts to turn the Pacific Northwest into a fossil fuel export hub. She also leads Earthjustice’s pesticide work and efforts to preserve access to the courts and legal remedies. Her litigation experience includes notable successes in safeguarding the region’s old-growth forests, restoring Pacific salmon, and more.

Also on The Ecologist: ‘Chlorpyrifos – cause of birth defects, mental impairment – sprayed on farms across the US‘ by Janette D. Sherman.

This article was originally published by EarthJustice.

In late December 2014, the social movement turned political party, Western Peoples Council, released a list of all mining concessions across Guatemala.

According to their data, which was obtained through the Ministry of Energy and Mining, and the National Council of Protected Areas, there are 990 permits for the exploration or exploitation of mineral resources in the country, 115 of which are for metallic resources such as gold, silver and copper.

Twenty of those permits are for projects in the small community of San José del Golfo, which sits about an hour to the north of Guatemala City. The first of these projects to begin operations is the El Tambor gold mine, owned by the US mining firm Kappes, Cassiday and Associates, or KCA, which is based in Reno, Nevada.

It doesn’t have to be too quiet to hear the operations at the El Tambor mine. During the day one can hear the churning of machinery in the distance. And at night the lights from the mine illuminate the horizon.

Fighting for life

On March 2, 2012, Yolanda Oquelí was driving her car between San José del Golfo and another community nearby when she observed the mining firm’s trucks turning down the road. She made a quick decision, and pulled her car in front of the trucks and blocked their access to the site.

It was in this moment that the barricade they called ‘La Puya’ named after the thorns of the bushes in the hills around the mine, was born. Since 2012, the community has maintained a 24-hour presence at the entrance of the mine. Every day between 16 and 20 community members take turns at the barricade.

As in other resistance movements against mining in Guatemala, the community was never informed of the project prior to the issuing of permits. The community is concerned that the mining project will not only lead to the destruction of their land, but their water as well.

“There is no country without water”, said Cristobal Diaz. “There is no life either when there is no water. That is our struggle. We are defending life.”

These concerns are supported by the fact that the official environmental impact report that was performed by government officials and the mining company was proven to be fraudulent by an independent study. The Guatemalan government and mining firm have argued that the mine represents development for the country. But community members have challenged this.

“It only represents development for the mining company”, said Felisa Muralles. “For us it means pollution of our water, and destruction of our environment.”

Dedication to nonviolence

The community has dedicated themselves to resisting the construction of the mine nonviolently. Due to their nonviolent discipline, a state of emergency has not been declared, the military has not been deployed, and no one has been killed.

Though the community has only received a few trainings in nonviolence, they are quick to point out that their reasoning for using nonviolent tactics is based off their understanding of the efficacy of nonviolence in other historical struggles.

“We have learned from other resistance movements”, said Muralles, many of which have seen “people killed and the military deployed to their communities”. So they chose a non-violent path that could never justify such responses: “We chose to resist nonviolently because we do not want to see anyone in our communities killed.”

In December 2012, community members put their lives on the line to block contractors who had arrived with mining machinery. The contractors were supported by hundreds of Guatemalan National Police who deployed tear gas on the community members. But the members of La Puya held their ground, and ensured the machinery did not arrive at the mine.

The resistance was able to delay the mining project for nearly two years, but in May 2014 the Guatemalan government deployed nearly a 1,000 highly trained elite police officers to evict the community members from their barricade.

Clouds of tear gas hung over the barricade, and rubber bullets were fired, as the police moved against those participating in the blockade. Behind the police were contractors for KCA, who successfully moved mining equipment to the site of the mine.

The government of Guatemala was responding to a threat of a lawsuit issued by the mining firm over the blockage of the project. KCA had argued that the community resistance was an infringement on their rights of investment at the location of the mine under the ‘investor-state dispute settlement’ provisions of the North American Free Trade Agreement.

The resistance returned to their barricade shortly after the eviction. The police have also maintained a constant presence at the entrance of the mine since the eviction, which has paradoxically provided security for the community members from attacks and intimidation from supporters of the mine.

This hasn’t always been the case. In June 2012, Yolanda Oquelí was shot in the back as she stood at the barricade. She still carries the bullet in her body today. There has yet to be an investigation.

Battling machismo

Women are at the forefront of the La Puya resistance. They are the ones who have stood face-to-face with police when they arrived to evict the community.

It feels like coming home from the moment one arrives at the barricade. The women are quick to offer every visitor a hearty plate of beans and rice, or a bowl of chicken soup, with tortillas.

The resistance has led to a change in the position of women within the community. The machismo that once permeated this farming community is beginning to be dismantled. “Before there was a lot of machismo”, Muralles said. “But once the men saw that this was a noble cause, they began to change their position. We are all a family that is struggling for radical change.”

According to both the men and women of the resistance, there has been a significant change in the relationships between them. “We now have our dignity”, Muralles said. “Before we were hesitant to speak out, but today we can speak up. And now the men listen.”

The presence of women at the front during confrontations with police is also a tactic that the movement uses because police in Guatemala cannot hit a woman without it backfiring. The women have faced intimidation and smear campaigns by supporters of the mine who have called the women ‘prostitutes’, and leaked nude photos of one woman on social media.

Yet the women of La Puya have waved off these attempts to discredit the movement.

Learning in movement

For the members of the resistance, the process of struggling against the mine has been a means of learning about their country and the world.

“Before we were ignorant”, Muralles said. “But now we have learned about the reality of the world. About what mining means for our community – sickness, destruction of the environment … We are learning in movement.”

Locally, community members have received support from activists in the city as well as other social movements. This support comes in the form of donations of food, coffee and water, as well as solidarity from the other social movements across Guatemala.

Because of their unique story, the community resistance of La Puya has also received international attention and support. On one of my visits to the barricade there was a group from Spain visiting. In the past, groups from Argentina, Mexico and other countries have joined the community. It has represented an important means of sharing their struggle, and the struggles to defend territory across Guatemala, with the world.

One way that the movement has brought in new supporters to the resistance has been through regular celebrations held at the barricade. On a monthly basis, the community welcomes supporters from across Guatemala and abroad to their community to observe important holidays, such as Christmas, or celebrations of life where they hold Mayan ceremonies.

“We welcome people here because we want people from other places to know our struggle”, Muralles said during the festivities marking Christmas.

This connection to the world has led the communities to see their struggle against mining as part of a global struggle – one they are especially aware of in Mexico and other Latin American countries, says Muralles:

“Their struggles are similar or the same as ours. We are trying to connect with them to struggle together.”

Jeff Abbott is an independent journalist currently based out of Guatemala. He has covered human rights, social moments and issues related to education, immigration and land in the United States, Mexico and Guatemala. His work has appeared at Truthout, Upside Down World, and North American Congress on Latin America. Follow him on Twitter @palabrasdeabajo.

This article was originally published by Waging Nonviolence under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 licence.

A major blow has been dealt to illegal fishing in the Southern Ocean with the detention of the Nigerian flagged poaching Vessel, Viking, in Malaysia.

Held for violations of Malaysian maritime law, Malaysian authorities have indicated that the Viking will also be investigated for alleged illegal, unregulated, unreported (IUU) fishing violations.

The vessel was detained with 18 crew on board; one Chilean, two Peruvian and 15 Indonesian citizens. The Captain of the vessel, whose nationality is unknown, has been arrested.

The Viking is one of the six remaining illegal, unregulated, unreported (IUU) fishing vessels – which Sea Shepherd calls the ‘Bandit 6’ – that are known to target vulnerable toothfish in the waters surrounding Antarctica, and is the second vessel of the six that has been detained by authorities this month.

The Viking, like its five counterparts, has a long history of illegal fishing. In 2013, the vessel, then called Snake, was the first vessel to be issued with an Interpol Purple Notice for fishing-related violations following a petition from authorities in Norway.

The owners and operators of the vessel are suspected of violating national laws and regulations, as well as international conventions by engaging in fraud and fisheries-related crimes.

Sea Shepherd in hot pursuit of second bandit vessel

Meanwhile the Sea Shepherd ship Bob Barker is engaged in a record-breaking pursuit of the most notorious of the ‘Bandit 6’ vessels, the Thunder, which prior to it being stripped of its registration last week, was also flagged to Nigeria.

Peter Hammarstedt, Captain of the Bob Barker, said, “In May 2014, the Thunder was detained in Malaysia. Despite being found guilty of illegal fishing activity, the vessel was let off with a small fine and allowed to return to its illegal operations.

“Seven months later, my crew and I intercepted the Thunder on the Banzare Bank in Antarctica, again engaged in illegal fishing activity. These are seasoned, repeat offenders who will not be deterred by a slap on the wrist.”

Captain Sid Chakravarty of the Sea Shepherd ship, Sam Simon, said, “Last week, Sea Shepherd reported the attempted suicide of an Indonesian crewmember on board the poaching vessel, Thunder.

“We have sought the advice of human rights experts who have indicated that the suicide attempt was all in likelihood directly related to the poor and exploitative conditions experienced on board that poaching vessel.

“In light of this, and the extensive body of information which indicates that a rampant slave trade underpins IUU fishing operations, we implore Malaysian authorities to speak to the 15 Indonesia crew on board the Viking, and to thoroughly investigate the likelihood that human rights violations have taken place.”

Bandit Captain charged for false reporting of toothfish catch

Thai authorities have confirmed that the Captain of a third poaching vessel, the Kunlun – which was chased from its hunting grounds inside Australian waters by the Sea Shephed vessel Sam Simon in February – has been charged for falsely reporting its illegal catch of 182 tonnes of Antarctic toothfish as grouper.

Captain of the poaching vessel, Jose Alberto Zavaleta Salas, faces further charges for falsely reporting the ship’s flag and registration.

The handler that received the fish, South Services Co Ltd, has also been charged for its role in illegally importing the fish into Thailand.

Captain Chakravarty has praised international policing organisation, Interpol, for their efforts in spearheading the investigations into the Viking, Thunder and Kunlun.

“All three of the vessels that are currently being investigated have been issued with Interpol Purple Notices. By doing so, the Environmental Crime Unit’s Project Scale has set in motion the wheels to bring together international cooperation to tackle poaching in the Southern Ocean.

“Under their expertise, national investigators now have the chance to investigate fisheries crimes to bring about successful prosecutions of these vessels. From the waters of West Africa to the shores of Mauritius and now the ports of Thailand and Malaysia, Interpol is leading the proceedings to shut down these poachers.”

A successful first season for Operation Icefish

The poaching vessels are the target of Sea Shepherd’s first Southern Ocean Defence Campaign to target IUU fishing operators in the waters of Antarctica, Operation Icefish.

While Sea Shepherd applauds the detention of the Viking, the organisation is now appealing to Malaysian authorities to ensure that the owners and officers of the vessel are prosecuted, the vessel scrapped and its catch confiscated.

“The only way to ensure that the Viking does not return to pillage the Southern Ocean is for the vessel to be impounded, and for the operators and officers to be arrested for their crimes”, said Sea Shepherd’s Captain Peter Hammarstedt.

Source: Sea Shepherd.

A major blow has been dealt to illegal fishing in the Southern Ocean with the detention of the Nigerian flagged poaching Vessel, Viking, in Malaysia.

Held for violations of Malaysian maritime law, Malaysian authorities have indicated that the Viking will also be investigated for alleged illegal, unregulated, unreported (IUU) fishing violations.

The vessel was detained with 18 crew on board; one Chilean, two Peruvian and 15 Indonesian citizens. The Captain of the vessel, whose nationality is unknown, has been arrested.

The Viking is one of the six remaining illegal, unregulated, unreported (IUU) fishing vessels – which Sea Shepherd calls the ‘Bandit 6’ – that are known to target vulnerable toothfish in the waters surrounding Antarctica, and is the second vessel of the six that has been detained by authorities this month.

The Viking, like its five counterparts, has a long history of illegal fishing. In 2013, the vessel, then called Snake, was the first vessel to be issued with an Interpol Purple Notice for fishing-related violations following a petition from authorities in Norway.

The owners and operators of the vessel are suspected of violating national laws and regulations, as well as international conventions by engaging in fraud and fisheries-related crimes.

Sea Shepherd in hot pursuit of second bandit vessel

Meanwhile the Sea Shepherd ship Bob Barker is engaged in a record-breaking pursuit of the most notorious of the ‘Bandit 6’ vessels, the Thunder, which prior to it being stripped of its registration last week, was also flagged to Nigeria.

Peter Hammarstedt, Captain of the Bob Barker, said, “In May 2014, the Thunder was detained in Malaysia. Despite being found guilty of illegal fishing activity, the vessel was let off with a small fine and allowed to return to its illegal operations.

“Seven months later, my crew and I intercepted the Thunder on the Banzare Bank in Antarctica, again engaged in illegal fishing activity. These are seasoned, repeat offenders who will not be deterred by a slap on the wrist.”

Captain Sid Chakravarty of the Sea Shepherd ship, Sam Simon, said, “Last week, Sea Shepherd reported the attempted suicide of an Indonesian crewmember on board the poaching vessel, Thunder.

“We have sought the advice of human rights experts who have indicated that the suicide attempt was all in likelihood directly related to the poor and exploitative conditions experienced on board that poaching vessel.

“In light of this, and the extensive body of information which indicates that a rampant slave trade underpins IUU fishing operations, we implore Malaysian authorities to speak to the 15 Indonesia crew on board the Viking, and to thoroughly investigate the likelihood that human rights violations have taken place.”

Bandit Captain charged for false reporting of toothfish catch

Thai authorities have confirmed that the Captain of a third poaching vessel, the Kunlun – which was chased from its hunting grounds inside Australian waters by the Sea Shephed vessel Sam Simon in February – has been charged for falsely reporting its illegal catch of 182 tonnes of Antarctic toothfish as grouper.

Captain of the poaching vessel, Jose Alberto Zavaleta Salas, faces further charges for falsely reporting the ship’s flag and registration.

The handler that received the fish, South Services Co Ltd, has also been charged for its role in illegally importing the fish into Thailand.

Captain Chakravarty has praised international policing organisation, Interpol, for their efforts in spearheading the investigations into the Viking, Thunder and Kunlun.

“All three of the vessels that are currently being investigated have been issued with Interpol Purple Notices. By doing so, the Environmental Crime Unit’s Project Scale has set in motion the wheels to bring together international cooperation to tackle poaching in the Southern Ocean.

“Under their expertise, national investigators now have the chance to investigate fisheries crimes to bring about successful prosecutions of these vessels. From the waters of West Africa to the shores of Mauritius and now the ports of Thailand and Malaysia, Interpol is leading the proceedings to shut down these poachers.”

A successful first season for Operation Icefish

The poaching vessels are the target of Sea Shepherd’s first Southern Ocean Defence Campaign to target IUU fishing operators in the waters of Antarctica, Operation Icefish.

While Sea Shepherd applauds the detention of the Viking, the organisation is now appealing to Malaysian authorities to ensure that the owners and officers of the vessel are prosecuted, the vessel scrapped and its catch confiscated.

“The only way to ensure that the Viking does not return to pillage the Southern Ocean is for the vessel to be impounded, and for the operators and officers to be arrested for their crimes”, said Sea Shepherd’s Captain Peter Hammarstedt.

Source: Sea Shepherd.

A major blow has been dealt to illegal fishing in the Southern Ocean with the detention of the Nigerian flagged poaching Vessel, Viking, in Malaysia.

Held for violations of Malaysian maritime law, Malaysian authorities have indicated that the Viking will also be investigated for alleged illegal, unregulated, unreported (IUU) fishing violations.

The vessel was detained with 18 crew on board; one Chilean, two Peruvian and 15 Indonesian citizens. The Captain of the vessel, whose nationality is unknown, has been arrested.

The Viking is one of the six remaining illegal, unregulated, unreported (IUU) fishing vessels – which Sea Shepherd calls the ‘Bandit 6’ – that are known to target vulnerable toothfish in the waters surrounding Antarctica, and is the second vessel of the six that has been detained by authorities this month.

The Viking, like its five counterparts, has a long history of illegal fishing. In 2013, the vessel, then called Snake, was the first vessel to be issued with an Interpol Purple Notice for fishing-related violations following a petition from authorities in Norway.

The owners and operators of the vessel are suspected of violating national laws and regulations, as well as international conventions by engaging in fraud and fisheries-related crimes.

Sea Shepherd in hot pursuit of second bandit vessel

Meanwhile the Sea Shepherd ship Bob Barker is engaged in a record-breaking pursuit of the most notorious of the ‘Bandit 6’ vessels, the Thunder, which prior to it being stripped of its registration last week, was also flagged to Nigeria.

Peter Hammarstedt, Captain of the Bob Barker, said, “In May 2014, the Thunder was detained in Malaysia. Despite being found guilty of illegal fishing activity, the vessel was let off with a small fine and allowed to return to its illegal operations.

“Seven months later, my crew and I intercepted the Thunder on the Banzare Bank in Antarctica, again engaged in illegal fishing activity. These are seasoned, repeat offenders who will not be deterred by a slap on the wrist.”

Captain Sid Chakravarty of the Sea Shepherd ship, Sam Simon, said, “Last week, Sea Shepherd reported the attempted suicide of an Indonesian crewmember on board the poaching vessel, Thunder.

“We have sought the advice of human rights experts who have indicated that the suicide attempt was all in likelihood directly related to the poor and exploitative conditions experienced on board that poaching vessel.

“In light of this, and the extensive body of information which indicates that a rampant slave trade underpins IUU fishing operations, we implore Malaysian authorities to speak to the 15 Indonesia crew on board the Viking, and to thoroughly investigate the likelihood that human rights violations have taken place.”

Bandit Captain charged for false reporting of toothfish catch

Thai authorities have confirmed that the Captain of a third poaching vessel, the Kunlun – which was chased from its hunting grounds inside Australian waters by the Sea Shephed vessel Sam Simon in February – has been charged for falsely reporting its illegal catch of 182 tonnes of Antarctic toothfish as grouper.

Captain of the poaching vessel, Jose Alberto Zavaleta Salas, faces further charges for falsely reporting the ship’s flag and registration.

The handler that received the fish, South Services Co Ltd, has also been charged for its role in illegally importing the fish into Thailand.

Captain Chakravarty has praised international policing organisation, Interpol, for their efforts in spearheading the investigations into the Viking, Thunder and Kunlun.

“All three of the vessels that are currently being investigated have been issued with Interpol Purple Notices. By doing so, the Environmental Crime Unit’s Project Scale has set in motion the wheels to bring together international cooperation to tackle poaching in the Southern Ocean.

“Under their expertise, national investigators now have the chance to investigate fisheries crimes to bring about successful prosecutions of these vessels. From the waters of West Africa to the shores of Mauritius and now the ports of Thailand and Malaysia, Interpol is leading the proceedings to shut down these poachers.”

A successful first season for Operation Icefish

The poaching vessels are the target of Sea Shepherd’s first Southern Ocean Defence Campaign to target IUU fishing operators in the waters of Antarctica, Operation Icefish.

While Sea Shepherd applauds the detention of the Viking, the organisation is now appealing to Malaysian authorities to ensure that the owners and officers of the vessel are prosecuted, the vessel scrapped and its catch confiscated.

“The only way to ensure that the Viking does not return to pillage the Southern Ocean is for the vessel to be impounded, and for the operators and officers to be arrested for their crimes”, said Sea Shepherd’s Captain Peter Hammarstedt.

Source: Sea Shepherd.