Note: Transcripts may contain errors. If you wish to re-use all, or part of, a transcript, please contact CBC for permission. Please check the corresponding audio before quoting in print. Copyright © CBC 2016

The AIH Transcript for June 26, 2017

Hosts: Laura Lynch and Jeff Douglas

STORIES FROM THIS EPISODE

Prologue

LAURA LYNCH: Hello I'm Laura Lynch, sitting in for Carol off.

JEFF DOUGLAS: Good evening, I'm Jeff Douglas. This is As It Happens.

[Music: Theme]

LL: A departure on arrivals. Lower courts blocked it, but now the U.S. Supreme Court has partly reinstated it. And our guest says he'll keep fighting U.S. president Donald Trump's travel ban.

JD: Marching disorder. During Saturday's Fete Nationale parade in Montreal, our guest noticed a glaring racial divide. White people danced on top of the floats as black youth physically pushed them along.

LL: They're getting their catch, but there's a catch. When it comes to what ends up in their nets, Alaskan fishermen have always had to compete with killer whales. But as the orcas get smarter, the competition for fish is heating up.

JD: The rainbow disconnection. For the first time in its history the town of Taber, Alberta flies the pride flag. But two different incidents of vandalism show that not everyone wants to see it flying.

LL: First they got cold feet. Then they gave it the cold shoulder. But despite their discomfort, two men finished an extremely long swim in Manitoba's frigid Red River and their stubbornness was a cure for the uncommon cold.

JD: And… with that floppy face she is more likely to jowl at the moon. Martha the Neopolitan mastiff has a lot of extremely loose skin in the game, which is part of the why she is the proud, lethargic, flatulent winner of the title the “World's Ugliest Dog”. As It Happens, the Monday edition. Radio that figures she may be lazy, but she'll never run out of gas.

[Music: Theme]

Back To Top »

Part 1: Trump travel ban, Fete Nationale, ugliest dog

Trump travel ban

Guest: Mark Doss

JD: Today, the United States Supreme Court announced that they will reinstate part of President Trump's travel ban. At least for now. The country's highest court will rule on the legality of the ban later this year. Lower courts had completely blocked the executive order, which mandated a 90 day ban on any travelers from Libya, Iran, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen. And a 120 day ban on all refugees. Mark Doss is a supervising attorney with the International Refugee Assistance Project, a plaintiff in the travel ban case. We reached Mr. Doss in New York.

LL: Mr. Doss, the Supreme Court today partially revived the so-called Trump travel ban. What form is it going to take when it comes into effect on Thursday?

MARK DOSS: So it's a partial travel ban now, and the order says that anyone that has bonafide ties to a U.S. person or entity can come to the United States. But for those who don't they can't for a temporary period. So this revised executive order covers six Muslim majority countries, as well as all refugees regardless of nationality. It is in theory creating a temporary period of time where there will be studies done to look at the admissions process and what vetting procedures are needed while they would be banned from coming in. And that rationale has really been separated from the ban at this point right.

LL: Right, and I want to get into that in a few minutes. But first I just want to ask you about this this new bonafide connection test the Supreme Court has established. What does that mean.

MD: That's a great question and it is not clear. The order says if you have a bona fide connection to a person or entity in the United States you know obviously some of our plaintiffs have family members who are trying to come from overseas. And so that obviously counts, or if you are a student coming to study at a U.S. institution. But for us you know we believe that bonafide ties to the US means if you are a refugee who is in the U.S. resettlement process then a resettlement agency is going to receive you. That is a tie to an entity here in the United States and you should

LL: I want to ask you about this new "bonafide connection" test that the Supreme Court has established. What does that mean?

MD: It is not clear. Some of our plaintiffs have family members who are trying to come from overseas, and so that obviously counts, or if you are a student coming to study at a U.S. institution.But for us, we believe that bonafide ties to the U.S. means if you are a refugee who is in the U.S. resettlement process and a resettlement agency is going to receive you, that is a tie to an entity here in the United States and you should be admitted.

LL: What about a plane ticket? Would that be a tie?

MD: That's a good question, and that's something that I think will probably be litigated.It's our opinion that while the Supreme Court opinion is a mixed result for us, it is, if interpreted to the true letter of the order, rather narrow for who it affects, and if the government is interpreting it very broadly and overreached, we believe they'd be in violation of the Supreme Court order, and we would litigate that.

LL: It's interesting because the minority of judges today said that they would have upheld the travel ban entirely and said that what the court did in its ruling today was, in fact, create a great big open hole for people to start judging what "bonafide" is and it's going to result in a lot of court action and a lot of clogging up of resources. That seems to be what you're saying, is you're going to litigate this?

MD: Right, and so while we obviously disagree with their overall band should go into effect. I do think they’re right that there is going to be a lot of confusion as to what does “bonafide” mean? And there will be a lot of chaos. If the government breaches and is trying to deny our clients or other travellers from coming to the United States, and we believe they have a bonafide connection, we'll absolutely pursue that in court.

LL: We saw chaos the last time the travel ban was introduced at airports in the U.S. and around the world. Is that potentially going to be happening again?

MD: There is that potential because there is this ambiguity in the order. What does “bonafide” mean? Last time there was no guidance given to U.S. Customs and Border Protection officials about who to admit, who not to admit. There was no guidance given to airports and airlines. If that happens again, it's going to be the same thing where there's ambiguity and there's chaos. And so we at IRAP have been working around the clock, even before this order came out, to make sure that our network of volunteer attorneys are available at airports and that we will be monitoring the situation very closely to make sure that it's being implemented in a way that's true to the Supreme Court order.

LL: You mentioned the vetting process earlier. You would assume the government had been working on the vetting process all the way along, so when does the clock start on these 90 day… 120 day bans? Do they need all this time if they’ve been vetting in the interim?

MD: That is a great question, you would think that with the first executive order back in January, which requested 90 days to have studies done to see the vetting procedures that the studies would have been done by now. It’s been six months since that happened. And so it’s clear to us that this order is really just a “Muslim ban” using a pretense of national security and vetting.

LL: Now lower courts had suspended the ban entirely or set injunctions against it. Were you surprised to see the Supreme Court rule differently?

MD: So the Supreme Court actually hasn't decided on the merits yet. They haven't said this ban is constitutional or unconstitutional. So that's what's going to be heard in October. And we're very confident given the uniform opinion from all the lower courts, you from district and both appellate courts, it had a high likelihood of being unconstitutional, that the Supreme Court will find the same thing. I think this decision today doesn’t actually get to that question yet, but I think they’ve already found that parts of this travel ban can’t be enforced. And that’s without even hearing all of the merits.

LL: I'm wondering though in light of what the Supreme Court decided today and the coming partial reinstatement of the ban, would you advise your clients to go elsewhere? For example, to try to come to Canada instead?

MD: We've been working over the past few months to find alternative resettlement pathways for our clients who are refugees. Because one of the things that the band does is reduce the number of refugees accepted by the United States. It was supposed to be 110,000. Now it's down to 50,000. And so that leads a lot of limited slots available for our clients and so we've been looking into other countries like Canada, Australia, or countries in Europe, which are also taking refugees and seeing if our clients can be channeled that way. Because, when it comes down to it, these are individuals who are incredibly vulnerable. Who have fled from horrible persecution for either their religious beliefs or political activism or for being LGBTI. And now they're being shut out from the United States. And so if another country can accept them we would be glad for them to get there to safety.

LL: Mr. Doss, thank you.

MD: Not a problem. Thank you.

LL: Bye bye.

MD: Take care.

JD: Mark Doss is a supervising attorney with the International Refugee Assistance Project, a plaintiff in the travel ban legal battle. We reached Mr. Doss in New York City. And we have posted more on that story on the As It Happens website; www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Hip-hop]

Fete Nationale

Guest: Emilie Nicolas

JD: In Montreal over the weekend, spectators gathered along St Denis Boulevard to catch the annual Fete Nationale parade. The floats were adorned with blue and white, performers saying to celebrate the city's 375th anniversary. But amidst all this, Emilie Nicolas noticed a glaring racial divide: white performers dancing atop the float, black youth pushing the float along. Ms Nicolas was a spectator in the crowd. Her house is located along the parade route, but she is also the president of Quebec Inclusif, an organization that promotes diversity in the province. We reached Emilie Nicolas in Montreal.

LL: Ms. Nicolas, can you describe the float you saw at the Fete Nationale parade on Saturday?

EMILIE NICOLAS: Yes, the opening of the parade, which became vile because of the video. You know you see basically black teenagers supporting white artists, and being surrounded by also white dancers and singers. Everybody's dressed in white but them who are dressed in beige. I also saw, and filmed, the closing of the parade where you had a bunch of white artists also playing music. There were twenty of them perhaps — all white — and black teenagers pushing the float as well.

LL: So these weren’t motorized floats?

EN: No, the organizers say it's because they want to be responsible for the environment. Some of them have been motorized in the past still, but in ways that we're not using fossil fuels. They've been pushed by people as well in the past.

LL: When you saw the flow that you saw on Saturday what was your first reaction?

EN: Well, when I saw that you see right away you know it resonates and brings back images of slavery, images of colonialism. People saw a painting in Congo that looks exactly like that. And it hurts because it's remnant of the place that too often unfortunately black people still have in Quebec society to this day. Systemic racism is a reality in Canada like it is elsewhere in the world. And so when you see black people at the bottom and white people, it is unfortunately an accurate description of what is too often still the case.

LL: Tell me about this festival itself? What were the performers singing about? What were they trying to celebrate?

EN: So National Day basically in Quebec. All the parade floats are descriptions of different aspects of Quebec history, and the specific theme for the year was the 375th anniversary of Montreal. So the last float that I described that was white only on top and black at the bottom was actually specifically about Montreal’s history.

LL: The organizers of the parade said the event has never been more diverse. And the fact that there were black people, people of color, pushing the floats was a coincidence. What do you make of that contention?

EN: Well, so actually the kids were recruited through a school. They are part of the sports teams of the school, so basically the organizers made a donation to the school, and in exchange the kids accepted to participate and be volunteers for the parade. So it is not just a coincidence. It's also in a way an example of the inequalities that exist in the funding of schools in Quebec because I don't imagine that people from private schools would have been pushing the floats just to get money for their uniforms or to fund their schools.

LL: But the coach of the school sports team spoke up saying it's a shame that people only focused on race. He's suggesting too that the students wanted to be there. What do you say to that?

EN: Well, I think when people see color they don’t only see the color of the kids, they see the color of the people they were pushing, and they were all white. And that's what makes the image so striking. And the fact that people chose to be there is a direct reasonability of the organizers. So I'm not blaming anybody on the school's part or the coach’s part. This is really about the organization of the parade. And it is about, in a way, systemic inequalities in Quebec.

LL: So then do you think it was simply ignorance on the part of the organizers? Or was something else more nefarious at play?

EN: I think the organizers didn't think this through, but I think it's their job to think. So the fact that they made a mistake to not see this and you know when people were taking their place in floats in the parade when nobody raised the flag of this is what it looks like. That tells me that people don't have enough of a sense of Quebec's black history to see what this looked like. So this is what worries me. It’s not the fact that I'm thinking they made this intentionally. That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying that this is what it looks like, and people are trying to blame the viewers for seeing it for what it is rather than admitting that the way that it looks doesn't look good. The whole point of National Day — the whole point of the parade — like this are symbols and symbols of Quebec’s history. So people saw in this what they're supposed to see, which is allegories of Quebec history. So you don't blame the people who saw the video or saw the parade for seeing the allegory of racism in Quebec’s history in that. We say I'm sorry that we didn't raise any flags or doing anything about this. And here's a plan of how we're going to do better at including diversity. Not just including them in any role, but including them as well at the decision making level, on top of the floats, as well as on the streets.

LL: In the midst of all of this, you have been trying to get the government to launch a commission into systemic racism in Quebec. How are you looking at those discussions now after what you saw on the weekend?

EN: It just reminds us of how important it is to have conversations in Quebec about the place of diversity, and place of minorities, and the place of black people specifically in our cultural event, and in our media. There is a lot of work to do. We are either misrepresented or not represented. And this is just you know a part of the whole puzzle that we need to look at. And I hope that the commission into systemic racism that the government should be launching will look into that as into many other aspects of the problem.

LL: Ms. Nicolas, I thank you for your time.

EM: Thank you.

JD: Emilie Nicolas is the president of Quebec Inclusif. We reached her in Montreal.

[Music: Folk]

Dup deal

JD: After losing her majority government in a snap election a few weeks ago, British Prime Minister Theresa May has made a deal. And today, Northern Ireland's Democratic Unionist Party, the DUP, agreed to support the Conservative’s minority government. Included in the deal is a reported $1.68 billion dollars Canadian of extra money for Northern Ireland. Now earlier today, Lord Michael Heseltine spoke with the BBC. Lord Michael Heseltine is the former Conservative deputy prime minister. And here is part of what he had to say about the deal between the DUP and the Conservatives.

SOUNDCLIP

MICHAEL HESELTINE: This is not a long term solution because even adding the DUP votes to the Tory votes, there is still the risk of lost by-elections eroding the majority. I don't know how much actually has been promised under this deal, but whatever it is what does Ruth Davidson say to the loyal Scots that she is persuaded to join the Tories? What do the Welsh Torries say as they see money pouring into Northern Ireland in formulae that don't apply to them? What does Corbyn say to all those marginal seats in the northwest, the northeast, and the southwest? This is a deeply divided country. And singling out one part of it in order to give a semblance of short term stability is just one more of the prices we paying for the consequences of Brexit.

FEMALE VOICE: Is it your view that Theresa May should have tried to struggle on without having a deal with the DUP?

MH: Well, I don't think it would make any difference because I can't think of Scots are going to vote for another general election in the short term. So I think that there is time for Theresa May to do what I think needs to be done, which is to give the Conservative Party time to make up its mind how it intends to fight a general election in probably 18 months — two years’ time. Who's going to lead it? And what are they going to say? That's the great benefit that Teresa could now give to the Conservative Party because for sure she won't be the leader of the Conservative Party when we get to the next election.

JD: Former British deputy Prime Minister Lord Michael Heseltine speaking with the BBC earlier today.

[Music: Guitar]

Ugliest dog

Guest: Shirley Zindler

JD: It looks kind of like her body shrunk, but her skin stayed the same size. Or perhaps she might have put on a giant oversized dog costume. Maybe her big brother’s, most of it is dangling loosely off her frame. Personally, I think she's beautiful, but according to the judges at the annual Sonoma-Marin Fair in California, she is the “World's Ugliest Dog” Martha. You can be the judge yourself. We've posted some photographs of Martha at www.cbc.ca/aih. Shirley Zindler is one of the co-founders of the Dogwood Animal Rescue Project. She has been fostering Martha. We reached Ms. Zindler in New York.

LL: Shirley, congratulations. Is that what you say to someone who wins “World's Ugliest Dog”?

SHIRLEY ZINDLER: You know I think so. I think it's an honor. The contest actually promotes adoption of dogs that wouldn't be as traditionally desirable. So I think it's a good thing.

LL: And how did Martha react to the big win?

SZ: Martha is very chill. Nothing fazes her. She pretty much slept through it.

LL: Even when she won her crown? She just rolled over?

SZ: Even then. If you look at the video footage when they announce it, I am happy, and Martha is snoring.

LL: OK. For those of us who haven't seen pictures, tell us what Martha looks like?

SZ: She's a huge, 125 pound Neopolitan mastiff. She's solid gray silver color. She has giant hanging jowls, tons of wrinkles, big droopy red eyes, and tons of skin. Way more skin than you would think for a dog her size.

LL: It's a bit unusual isn't it? Because most the time when I see these pictures of ugly dogs they're usually small dogs, and they're kind of spindly, and they have hair sticking out here and there and everywhere. She's a bit different. Is that what made her stand out then?

SZ: I think it was part of it. I mean all the rest of the dogs were like you said little, and old, and kind of spindly. And she's just this massive thing with heavy bones, droopy jowls, and wrinkles. And she was definitely a crowd favorite.

LL: And how did you first meet Martha?

SZ: So about six weeks ago, a fellow rescuer reached out to me and to our rescue group because she had seen the dog being given away on Craigslist. And she saw that her eyes were horribly infected. The dog was nearly blind and in chronic pain from her conditions that had not been addressed. And she reached out and asked if our rescue group, the Dogwood Animal Rescue Project, could take her and get her the care that she needed. And that's what we did. We took her in. She's had several surgeries that restored some of her sight, but most of all you got her out of pain. She's no longer in any pain. So it's really a great thing.

LL: I read a description of her that aside from her appearance said these are the words I read, “drooling”, “snoring”, “gassy”, “loud”…

SZ: That’s pretty much her.

LL: I don't know if personality is the right word, but what is her personality like?

SZ: You know most of the time super mellow and chill. But when she's up and moving she is very playful, very funny, really adorable. Loves to play, gets along with the other rescue dogs that we have at Dogwood. You know she bosses the other dogs around. If anybody's playing too rough with the puppies she'll go over and tell them off. And she's very friendly. Loves people and you know gets along with everybody.

LL: And how loud is her snoring?

SZ: Her snoring is very loud. It pretty much rattles the walls. At home she doesn't sleep in the same room with us because we would sleep. In the hotel, surprisingly, I think we were tired enough we were able to sleep through it. But I did get some audio of her snoring last night because it was spectacular.

LL: So you're her foster mom, but she is getting a new home. Where is she going?

SZ: She is going to a lovely family in Pine Grove, California about 20 minutes from my house. 11 acres, a pond, and they've rescued multiple other giant breed dogs and are very familiar with the special needs of mastiffs and St. Bernards and those type of dogs that are kind of unique.

LL: And what do her new parents think of Martha's fame?

SZ: You know there they were there cheering her on. They were thrilled to death. It was kind of a last minute thing to put her in. We only entered her you know like four days before the contest. And I had checked with them first to make sure they were fine with it and they thought it was a great idea. So they had chosen her long before the contest, but were just waiting for her to heal up after all her surgeries and be ready to go home. So they're there eagerly awaiting her arrival, and she is going to have an amazing life.

LL: Well, Shirley, pass on our congratulations to Martha herself, and thanks for talking to us today.

SZ: Absolutely. Thank you.

LL: Bye bye.

SZ: Bye.

LL: Shirley Zindler has been fostering Martha, the winner of this year's “World's Ugliest Dog” contest. We reached Ms. Zindler in New York. You can see some photographs of beautiful Martha on our website: www.cbc.ca/aih. And as she told Laura in that interview, Martha makes a lot of noise when she sleeps. So here is a clip of her, Martha that is, snoring. This is from the talk show Live With Kelly and Ryan.

SOUNDCLIP

[Sound: A dog snoring]

SZ: That was here.

RYAN SEACREST: That was moments ago?

SZ: That was.

FEMALE HOST: I can feel the floor shaking from that.

SZ: See why she doesn’t sleep in our bedroom?

RS: Yeah, I can see.

JD: That was Martha the Neapolitan mastiff snoring. If you have a dog, as I do, who's snoring might just rival Martha’s, we'd like to hear from you. We'd also like to hear your dog. So make a recording, send it along in an email to aih@cbc.ca, or you can reach us on Facebook or Twitter, both those accounts @cbcasithappens.

Back To Top »

Part 2: Whales v.s. fishermen, Pride: Taber

Whales v.s. fishermen

Guest: Buck Laukitis

JD: When commercial fishermen in Alaska's Bering Sea go out on the water, they expect to spend most of their time fishing. And so it's been frustrating for them lately because they have been spending most of their time not fishing, but running from orcas. The whales have realized that the fishermen are something like a drive through or a buffet. And they have started eating the humans catch before the humans can haul it aboard. Buck Laukitis is one of the many frustrated fishermen dealing with this battle. We reached him out on the water in Prince Williams Sound, Alaska on his boat, the Stanley Kay.

LL: Buck, how long have orcas has been a problem for Alaskan fishermen?

BUCK LAUKITIS: The last 10 years is when we’ve really started to see the biggest problems. And we say every year is worse than the previous year. The next year seems to get worse again. And last few years it's become nearly impossible.

LL: OK. So tell me how bad are things this year?

BL: Well, my boat this year was spent in April in the Bering Sea, and they basically got shut down by killer whales. They used all the normal avoidance techniques like shutting their engine off, drifting so they were silent, they ran 50 miles one direction 50 miles the other direction off the continental shelf edge. All the little tricks that they do and the whales were way smarter than we were. So we spent at least a week actively fishing and basically had the amount of product that you could catch in a decent morning. We had 4,000 pounds of halibut after seven days of fishing and $9,000 worth of fuel. And basically my skipper Robert just gave up. He just figured he just couldn't do it.

LL: You said 4,000 how much should you normally have had without the challenge of the whales?

BL: Oh, easily 4,000 pounds a day or twice that or more. I mean we try not to feed them because once they become used to your boat as an easy meal, they’ll follow you to the ends of the earth. And so immediately, if we see whales, we drop the gear back down and try to outweigh them. But that wasn't working this year.

LL: Now you talked about halibut, which is one of the most lucrative species that you can fish. But there are also deep swimmers, so whales don't normally feed near the bottom. Tell me what they actually do to get at the catch you're bringing in?

BL: Well, we've found out that the whales actually can dive deeper than we would expect. It was kind of a conventional wisdom that if you had your halibut gear deeper than 200 fathoms, a fathom is six feet, that the whales couldn't dive down that deep. And we had whales diving on out gear at 285 fathoms, so you know almost 1,800 feet.

LL: Do they chew through the nets? Or how do they get at the fish?

BL: No, it’s just individual hooks. So it's called long line and it's just a hook every 10 feet. And they're really adept at just plucking them off the hooks. They don't leave heads, they don't leave lips. They used to leave heads and they used to leave lips and it was a little bit easier to tell what was happening. But now they're really adept at plucking them off. And the sperm whales, which is another whale that likes to eat Long liner’s fish, they actually kind of floss. They kind of run those lines through their big teeth and floss with the line as it's being retrieved and pluck off black cod that way.

LL: Yeah. That is the kind of good dental hygiene that I'm sure you're not appreciating right now.

BL: Yeah, we don't appreciate that. They actually love the ones that most consumers in North America love and that’s the black cod and the halibut.

LL: Can you see them from the boat? Because these whales normally they would be jumping out of the water. That's the way they have to breathe at certain points. Can you actually see them?

BL: Yeah, sometimes playing right alongside the boat. You can see them teaching their young. You can see the whole families. They have the ability to communicate over long distances. It's almost uncanny how you can have one whale with you and in a short period of time, when we start hauling gear, you'll have 30 to 50 in a matter of hours they come charging in from all points. Now, this isn't happening everywhere in Alaska. It's happening mostly on the continental shelf break, which is where the relatively shallow water meets the abyss, so to speak. So it's the most productive edges. They're not the whales that you see around Vancouver. These are probably what they call the off shore population of killer whales. They are the least understood and least seen except by fishermen. And you know we really are hoping to get a better understanding of their population, and they seem to be doing very well. Lots of healthy looking babies; It seems like you can see them going over the course of the season. I think that's testament to the omega 3s that they're eating from the black cod and halibut.

LL: Unfortunately for you. When you do see them, do you ever get the sense that they're taunting you?

BL: No, no.This is more like the best analogy would be like a dump bear. In Canada I'm sure you're familiar with the Bears that have become kind of cultured.

LL: Yeah.

BL: Habituated to the easy meal, and whatever they were eating before I'm sure is still there. They just find this to be easier, and they're really smart and good at it. So we don't have any way to actively deter the whales under our Marine Mammal Protection Act. There's some acoustical deterrents that people have tired. That's become like a dinner bell. There's no deterrence, so all we can do is try to avoid them.

LL: For example, you could not shoot a whale?

BL: No, absolutely not. I'm also a fisheries regulator in the federal fisheries, and you know on that side of things, we really do have to provide solutions. And one of the solutions is to allow long liners to fish with pots or traps. The whales have not been able to get inside of a trap or a pod. And so that's one thing that we at the Federal Fisheries Management Council we're pursuing that option to allow fishermen to harvest fish in a different way.

LL: We've reached you out on your boat today, and your fishing salmon. Have you seen any whales around?

BL: Yeah, we've seen whales. We don't have any interactions with them. These are the resident whales that most people are familiar with, and they're usually eating salmon. We're just starting the salmon season here. They're really good at avoiding nets, and they don't present any problem to us here. Love to see them as part of the scenery. But there's no challenges with the killer whales around our salmon fishery at all.

LL: Buck, I'm wondering as you describe all of this, what is at stake here for you and for other fishermen? It seems like quite a struggle?

BL: Yeah, it's pretty much like the old man in the sea. It's an epic kind of primordial struggle. I mean our crews work for 18-20 hours a day baiting the hooks, the gear, and then you set the gear you know the fish are there, you know where to fish. We have lots of challenges as commercial fishermen, you know the weather, you’re two-hundred miles off shore, you have plenty of stress, and then do all that work and then basically not be able to get anything back. And to do that one day is one thing, but to do it day after day, after day, and then potentially a whole season. And not to be able to you know pay the bills is kind of what we potentially are looking at. I mean we always thought we'd be able to get through this, but it's just becoming harder and harder and that's why we want to get ahead of it. I mean this is an environmental change, so we adapt to it. And if we can fish you know a slightly different way with the same boat we know we can try to adapt or we're not going to survive here.

LL: Buck, I’ll let you get back to your fishing. Thanks very much.

BL: You bet. Nice visiting with you. Have a good day.

LL: You too. Bye bye.

BL: OK. Thanks.

JD: Buck Laukitis is a fisherman whose catch has been increasingly intercepted, I guess, by clever killer whales. We reached Mr. Laukitis on his boat in Prince Williams Sound, Alaska.

[Music: Violin and piano duet]

Winnipeg swim

JD: It was murky green and freezing. It was not that type of water you'd want to be immersed in for almost 10 hours. And yet, that is exactly how three friends in Winnipeg spent their Sunday. And Pat Peacock, Taren Gesell, and the CBC's Jacques Marcoux didn't just splash around in the Red River for fun. They attempted to swim 37-kilometers. And this morning, Mr. Gesell spoke with Marcy Markusa, host of CBC Winnipeg’s “Information Radio”, about their experience. And here's part of that conversation.

SOUNDCLIP

TAREN GESELL: It's a bit surreal. I was saying yesterday after it was all done that your brain almost kind of turns off to what's going on at the time. And I don't think it's quite on yet.

MARCY MARKUSA: So it may even actually be the longest swim in the Red River, we're checking on that. You might actually have that distinction now. Where did you get this idea from then?

TG: Well, I almost said it as a farce. After a long swim in 2014 Pat, said alright, what are we doing next as a joke? And as a joke I said well, if we're going to do it again, I'm not going to do it unless it's a big event. And there are hundreds of people that see it. And I would have to be something like the Red River. And I almost said it to kind of slough it off so I'd never have to do it. And then last year, there were some studies that came out and said that the Red River actually isn't as dirty as you think. And Pat texted me and he said OK, I'm in. And I went oh geez; I guess we have to do this now.

MM: You had your wife, brother, dad all on these boats beside you supporting you. What did it mean to have those folks with you?

TG: It was incredibly comforting knowing that they were going to be there. More so as we were coming into it. Right before we set off, everyone got hugs and I knew that I was going to be in really the last time that I was going to be able to talk to them with any sort of coherent words.

MM: Yeah, you're swimming.

TG: And because your brain is sort of turned off to it, you almost don't really connect the person that is feeding you and wanting to talk to you is a loved one. It's weird where your mind goes at that point. But one thing that I've done for this swim and the previous swim is everyone said take your ring off let me take your ring.

MM: Your wedding ring?

TG: Let me take your wedding band off. And I purposefully leave it on, so that when I am lonely and when I am feeling like I want a break from just the mental strain, I actually I with my left thumb I rub my wedding band. And that's kind of like hugging my wife.

JD: That was Taren Gesell speaking with “Information Radio” host Marcy Markusa this morning. Yesterday, Mr. Gesell completed a 37-kilometer swim along with two friends from the south Perimeter to the north Perimeter Highway of the Red River in Winnipeg.

[Music: Orchestral]

Pride: Taber

Guest: Kathleen McKenzie

JD: “A small town with big hearts.” That was the tagline for the first-ever pride event held in the southern Alberta town of Taber just two weeks ago. The town also mark the occasion by hoisting the Pride flag for the first time. But since it was raised, the flag has already been vandalized twice. Last week, it was torn up and tied to tree branches. And this weekend, it was targeted again. Police are treating the latest incident as arson. Kathleen MacKenzie is the co-chair of the Taber Equality Alliance Society, the group that organized this Pride event, and the raising of the flags. We reached Ms. McKenzie in Taber.

LL: Ms. Mackenzie, tell me what it was like to find out that the flag had been vandalized for a second time?

KATHLEEN MCKENZIE: I think my initial feeling I was just really heartbroken I guess. It was very sad. I hoped the first time was just a prank and it was a joke, but then somebody actually took the time to burn. It was definitely a different feeling than the first time it was vandalized.

LL: What happened? How did you find out about it?

KM: Someone had drove by and said that it was burnt, and had contacted the police. And they were the ones who contacted the other co-chair of Taber, and she was the one who let us all know.

LL: Do you have any idea who might have done this?

KM: No, I wish I did. There are cameras at the park where the flagpole is. Hopefully those cameras picked up something.

LL: There may be security footage at the site?

KM: Yes. Yes. The first time it was vandalized, they had covered the cameras. So there was nothing on tape of course because the cameras had something thrown over top of them. So we're hoping that maybe these people didn't.

LL: Is there any reason to believe that this is the same person or people?

KM: It very well could be. Absolutely, I wouldn't doubt it now that has happened twice. So we're just hoping we can get it back up there tonight. And you know figure out some way to keep an eye on it.

LL: Well, I want to get to that in a second. But first, what do you think motivates these kinds of acts?

KM: Just an intolerance and hatred. People don't understand, and instead of trying to understand they just lash out.

LL: You live in Taber though, have you experienced discrimination? Has the LGBTQ community in Taber experienced this kind of discrimination?

KM: Some of them have. I am an ally, I haven’t. And that's why we started TEA. We wanted to make this town, our town, more friendly for everyone that's here.

LL: And those who you say have experienced discrimination, can you give me some examples of what the discrimination was?

KM: They wouldn't even come out here they were so scared. They would you know stay in the closet, if you will. And the only time they'd actually come out is if they went to the city, where they could be themselves. More and more people are coming out here, but they're finding people who are not accepting. Job wise, they still get looked down upon. Words are you know shouted out of car windows at certain people.

LL: Words like?

KM: Just very derogatory slang. I don't care to use the words myself.

LL: What has the response been like among others around you to the fact that the flag has been destroyed twice?

KM: We've had lots of really good social media coverage from lots of people that are supporting us. Lethbridge Pride has been sending messages to us and standing beside us and behind us. They're actually supplying the flags flying back up for the third time. This is the third time they've given us a flag.

LL: What about community leaders? The mayor or the local politicians?

KM: Well, we went before a town council. We had to get permission to have to raise the flag. And about six days after we got that permission, our mayor resigned. We don't know if that was the reason why? So right now, we're running just on an interim mayor, and we haven't heard anything from them. We do have a board that have been supportive to us.

LL: Ms. Mackenzie, I just want to follow that up a little bit more. You say the mayor resigned 10 days after you got permission to hold your Pride events. Had the mayor been speaking in opposition to granting you permission?

KM: Yes, he did at the meeting we had. We had to go before the town council, so it was the mayor and all the council people.

LL: Given all of that and the events with the flags, it sounds like Taber is not terribly tolerant?

KM: No, they're not. But that's what we're fighting for, and that's what we'll continue to fight for with love. We’re not going after these people ourselves. We’ll just keep putting that flag up. We have to 30th. I'm hoping myself I'll give up a couple of extra days for the time that we lost while it was down. We'll fly it until then and we’ll be back next year. Bigger and better. We were hoping actually next year to do a bit more than we did this year. Our whole ceremony this year was about four hours. So we're hoping for more for next year.

LL: You are raising the flag again later today as you said. Are you going to be doing anything to in effect stand on guard?

KM: We haven't discussed that. We haven't been able to get together. Today we will discuss that and see what we can do. And I'm hoping that maybe the police will come as well and see if you know if there's something we can do to make it safer.

LL: Ms. McKenzie, we will keep watching to see what happens. Thank you.

KM: You're welcome.

LL: Goodbye.

KM: Bye bye.

JD: Kathleen Mackenzie is the co-chair of the Taber Equality Alliance Society. And we reached her in Taber, Alberta.

[Music: Piano and chimes]

Gwen Barlee obit

JD: She is being remembered as one of the “fiercest, most strategic environmental activists in the movement.” British Columbia is Gwen Barlee died last week. She was 54-years-old. Ms. Barlee grew up in the Okanagan. She was surrounded by nature. She developed a passion for the environment. In 2001, she joined the Wilderness Committee, and campaigned to establish a national species at risk act. She also worked to defend B.C waterways from being turned into private power projects, and she advocated for the development of the South Okanogan National Park. And in 2014, Ms. Barlee was on this program. She spoke with Carol after the federal government abruptly downgraded the status of North Pacific humpback whales from a threatened species to a species of special concern. Here is part of that conversation.

SOUNDCLIP

GWEN BARLEE: The critical habitat for the Pacific humpback whales some of it is right smack dab in the middle of where oil tankers would be going — notably Gill Island, off the coast of British Columbia. And so, as environmentalists, we were scratching our heads. We thought the government has a legal responsibility to protect that habitat. How can they let oil tankers go through it? And then of course that answer came today when we found out that the federal government wants to reduce protections for this whale population.

CAROL OFF: You and other environmental groups were attempting to put obstacles to the Northern Gateway because of these species, is that right?

GB: Well, we actually wanted the federal government to obey its own environmental law, and that was this Species At Risk Act. And they had a legal requirement under that act to produce recovery strategies. And they had unlawfully delayed the recovery strategies for numerous species, but including the Pacific humpback whale.

CO: What is a recovery strategy?

GB: Scientists identify what the species, in this case the Pacific humpback whale, what they need to be able to survive and recover. And so one of the important things they do they identify the threats. And the threats in this case could be ship strikes or entanglement in fishing gear, but also oil spills. And then they say OK, well what does the species need? It needs protection from those things. It also needs to have habitat identified and protected where it maybe rears its young or where they feed. And so that's what a recovery strategy does. It's a blueprint for how to recover species at risk. And most importantly it will map critical habitat and that's a habitat of the species especially needs to survive and recover. And that's what they did for the humpback whale. And it was right in the middle of a proposed oil tanker route. And so the federal government is very bullish on the pipeline proposal and they want to see it go ahead. And the protection for the humpback whale was an impediment. They looked at that as a roadblock. And that's why we're so concerned because when you down-list a species from threat and the special concern, the federal government no longer has a legal requirement to be able to protect the critical habitat of Pacific humpback whales. And that means that we may have recovered them for not.

JD: From our archives, that was Gwen Barlee speaking with Carol in April of 2014. Ms. Barlee, an environmental activists in British Columbia, died last week. She was 54-years-old.

[Music: Jazz]

Duck horn

[Sound: A driving car]

JD: Hey there, I hope you don't mind. I just thought I'd get a jump on the traffic and do the last part of the show while I was driving home. Now, you could say your standard car has a big honking problem. Because…. oh come on! Quit tailgating me.

[Sound: A quacking duck]

JD: That was my car horn by the way. Oh and actually, it's a good thing that I had to honk it because it's a great segue into this story about a recent study conducted at Soongsil University in Seoul, South Korea. Now the researchers there wanted to find out what car horn sound was least irritating, while still being effective? And they asked dozens of people to rate the stressfulness of horn sounds, ranging from the old timey Klaxon-style horn.

[Sound: That old car horn sound you’ve heard in cartoons]

JD: That's kind of nice.

[Sound: The same horn]

JD: That’s nice! To a more modern horn currently being surrounded by the angry person behind me.

[Sound: A modern car horn]

JD: Yes, thank you. Thank you for the timely horn demonstration fellow driver. I'm waving at them, and they're waving back. Just not using the whole hand. In the end, the test subjects selected the sound that you heard my horn make at the beginning. A sound that says hey, I'm here and I'm insistent, but basically harmless… also waterproof.

[Sound: A duck quacking]

JD: So according to the researchers, a car horn that quack's is better for focus on the drivers end, and less terrifying for pedestrians and cyclists. Because, in the end, no one likes a loud stupid beep. But everyone enjoys a gentle wise quack.

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

CBC would like to acknowledge the support of the Broadcasting Accessibility Fund.

June 26, 2017 episode transcript

More Stories Like This