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 2020

The AIH Transcript for September 11, 2020

Hosts: Carol Off and Chris Howden

Prologue

CAROL OFF: Hello. I'm Carol Off.

CHRIS HOWDEN: Good evening. I'm Chris Howden. This is As It Happens.

[Music: Theme]

CH: Tonight:

CO: A world on fire. A California climate scientist says the fire is burning across the American west make it blazingly obvious: action is needed on climate change now.

CH: At least they agree to disagree. As a new school year begins across the country, some parents are battling each other in court over how and where their children will learn.

CO: No refuge. A fire in the Moria refugee camp leaves thousands with nowhere to turn. And a member of European Parliament says that leaves Europe with nowhere to hide from questions it's been avoiding for years.

CH: A calculated risk. When the Internet began to do a number on a teenager for her questions about math, a mathematician jumped in and crunched a few numbers.

CO: Through the looking glass. Last night, our story about Prince Edward Island's 'mason jar shortage' resonated with many of you. And tonight, we'll hear how you're dealing with the jarring loss of those magical glass vessels.

CH: And a whole new ballgame. We hear from a gym teacher who is pushing the limits of human ability and plausibility by taking a stab at the world record for swuggling: that is swimming while juggling. As It Happens. The Friday Edition. Radio that hopes he doesn't make a splash.

[Music: Theme]

Part 1: Oregon teacher breaks world record for 'swuggling' — swimming while juggling

Climate change fires

Guest: Peter Glick

CH: In recent days, Oregon, Washington, and California have turned into red states in the most catastrophic way possible. Hundreds of thousands of hectares are ablaze. And in major cities, the sky has taken on a hellish tinge across much of the West Coast. As people cough and flee their homes, climate scientists are in no mood to say 'I told you so,' but they are pointing to the fires as the latest dramatic wakeup call about climate change. And politicians are now echoing that call. Here's California Governor Gavin Newsom speaking in the middle of a burned out section of forest today.

GAVIN NEWSOM: When you have a heat dome over the entire West Coast of the United States, when you have temperatures, record breaking temperatures, record droughts, then you've got something else at play. And that's exactly what the scientists have been predicting for a half a century. It is here now. California, folks, is America fast forward. What we're experiencing right here is coming to a community all across the United States of American unless we get our act together on climate change, unless we disabuse ourselves of all the BS that's being spewed by a very small group of people that have an ideological reason to advance the cause of a 19th century framework and solution. We're not going back to the 19th century.

CH: California Governor Gavin Newsom talking to reporters today. Peter Glick is a climate scientist and president emeritus of the Pacific Institute. We reached him in Berkeley, California.

CO: Peter, you are actually living through what you and others have been predicting for some time now. Is this what you expected?

PETER GLICK: Well, I have to say, the last few weeks have been much worse than I or, I think, pretty much anyone expected. The fires that we're seeing in the West are bigger, they're faster, they're much more extensive than I think anyone has anticipated. And they're happening much sooner than we anticipated.

CO: What's it like? You're in Berkeley. I know you work in Oakland. And when you do go out you must be seeing through your window. What does it look like? What does it feel like?

PG: Well, so a few days ago, a couple of days ago, the sky was blood red -- a colour I've never seen before. We couldn't see the sun and it got darker and darker as the day went on. Today, the red is gone, but it's milky, smoky, hazy out there. And again, the sun...sort of there really is no sun. The whole region is covered in smoke.

CO: What is it about these fires that is so much more extreme?

PG: Well, I think what we're seeing is we're seeing fires that are far larger, far more extensive, far faster, far hotter than we've seen before. California right now has, I think, four or five of the worst fires we've ever seen in the last many decades, literally burning at the moment. And this is not normal. This is, unfortunately, an indication of some of the climate changes that we expected to see and that we're now beginning to see.

CO: It's interesting that for so many years now, when we cover the story of climate change and have had scientists reluctant to say that this extreme event or that other one is because of climate change. They say, well, we can't really say that. Why are you more why are scientists more inclined now to attribute these events to climate change?

PG: Yeah. So here's a very important distinction. We're not saying that this or that extreme event, this hurricane or this fire was caused by climate change. What we are saying is that it's unambiguous now that these events are influenced and worsened by climate change. The fires that we're seeing now are worse than they would otherwise be because it's been hotter, because it's been drier, because the soils and the forests have dried out, because we're seeing worse and worse heat extremes. And so the west of North America has had fires forever. But what we're seeing are fires that are more extreme, more severe than they otherwise would have been without climate change. And that's the difference. The climate community is now being very clear. The influence of climate change is here. We're seeing the climate changes that we've argued for a long time were coming, but we don't have to wait anymore. Unfortunately, they've arrived.

CO: And some are also saying that the science has been refined, that sort of attribution science is something that is a thing and that you can now more reliably say, yeah, this is because of what we've been saying for some years now.

PG: Yes, that's exactly right. The science of attribution, what we call climate fingerprinting, has improved and we now do see literally the influence of human-caused climate change on these extreme events, on these fires, on hurricanes that are stronger and carry more water than they did in the past. That's a big difference. It's no longer a question of when climate change is going to be here. It's here. The question is, how bad is it going to get moving into the future?

CO: Does it give you any satisfaction that so many people in leadership positions -- the governors of Oregon and California are saying this is you can't deny this is climate change no matter what happens, what's going on in the Whitehouse, we'll put that aside for a moment, but the fact that you now have leading people say there is no doubt that this is caused by climate change -- does that give you any satisfaction?

PG: Well, I wish it had happened earlier. The earlier it happens the faster we can address the problem. But it is true that more and more scientists are being clear about this. More and more of the public understand that climate change is here. And as a result, more and more of the politicians, more and more of our policymakers are beginning to think, 'I had better do something about this. Now, it's no longer a question of if, it's a question of how do we move forward.' So that is a little bit of good news. You know, the bad news is that it should have happened a long time ago. And there's a lot that could have been done to have made climate change less severe than we now know they're going to be.

CO: But there it is an if for some people, isn't it? I mean, it's not the fact that the president of the United States, he's skeptical of climate change. What effect does that have on your ability to get policy changed?

PG: Well, of course, the fact that the president of the United States is one of the few remaining climate deniers on the planet is a disturbing thing because he's in a position to prevent serious progress from being made. The rest of the world is moving forward on this. The truth is there aren't many climate deniers left because the reality is staring us in the face. You know, I'm looking out the window at it right now, but it would be nice if there was a change overall in the political environment.

CO: I have to say, your voice...it sounds scratchy. You sound like your breathing is a bit laboured. How are you going to cope with what -- you personally -- how are you and your family going to cope with what's going on right now?

PG: Well, so part of my morning routine now, you know, you get up, you have breakfast, you brush your teeth. Part of my morning routine now is checking air quality online. Hopefully the fires will be put out. Hopefully air quality will clear up. But in the meantime, we do what we can to stay safe. We do what we can to keep our families safe. You know, we've been inside for six months because of the coronavirus pandemic. But now we're inside because of that and concerns about air quality.

CO: Peter, I'm sorry you're going through all that, but I do appreciate that you'd speak with us. Thank you.

PG: Well, thank you for covering this issue.

CH: Peter Glick is a climate scientist and president emeritus of the Pacific Institute. He's in Berkeley, California.

[Music]

Moria protests

Guest: Damian Boeselager

CH: Living conditions for refugees on the Greek island of Lesbos were already dire. The camp is massively overcrowded, dangerously unhygienic, routinely violent. Doctors Without Borders called it the worst refugee camp on Earth. Human Rights Watch dubbed it an open air prison. And an advisor to the U.N. described it as a concentration camp. But somehow this week, it all got worse. [SOUNDCLIP: Crowd sounds]

CH: On Tuesday, a fire destroyed the camp, leaving its inhabitants homeless and increasingly hopeless on the streets of Lesbos. European countries have agreed to rehouse 400 unaccompanied minors who fled the fire. But for roughly 13,000 others, the future is more uncertain than ever. Damian Boeselager is a German member of the European Parliament, who has long argued that Europe should do more to help the people in the Moria camp. We reached him today in Berlin.

CO: Mr. Boeselager we have heard just some of the sound of those people -- hundreds of people who need a place to stay. What are you hearing about the conditions in which they are living right now currently?

DAMIAN BOESELAGER: I mean, you can't really call this living conditions because people are staying on the streets and not allowed to move very far away from the still warm ashes of the burnt down camp of Moria. And so it's really a horrible situation where we need to act fast, also the other member states of the European Union to help.

CO: And they have to point out that this is not the first time you and I have spoken. We have covered this story for months, years now, each time being told 'Yes, the European Union, is going to help Greece with this. Something's going to happen.' And yet here we are talking about this again. So what are the latest things that they're saying they're going to do for these people?

DB: Yeah. So when I think about, you know, our conversations, my big question over all of this is how much is enough? When I visited the camp a year ago now, I thought this is unbearable. There are more than 20,000 people living in really horrid living conditions in the camp, which was only built originally for 800. And then I thought when the pandemic hit, I thought, okay, you know, this is the moment where everybody will understand we need to evacuate, we need to get these people relocated to other member states. And now when the fire burnt down the camp, I thought this would be enough to at least, you know, push the member states to do something. There are talks about moving some of the accompanied minors away, which is obviously very positive, but which fails to accept that the whole camp approach is horrible and is below any form of humanitarian values that you could have.

CO: I think one of the last times we spoke was about those unaccompanied minors, those children. And your understanding was that at the very least, the unaccompanied minors in that camp were going to be moved. So what we're hearing is that that clearly never happened.

DB: They tried with I mean, basically first pledging quite large numbers and then retracting step by step. So, I mean, there were 50 minors moved to Germany and then another 12 to Luxembourg. And then when once the corona hit people were much more reluctant to take up these transports. And so it's just really a very small amount of people that are being moved. And you can't really see a big solidarity, but more symbolic act.

CO: France and Germany say they will attempt to rehouse about 400 of these children. Do you think that they will follow through on that pledge?

DB: I hope so. I mean, what you heard the Greek minister of migration saying was, 'hey, you know, nobody will leave this camp just because they decided to burn it down themselves. We will not give into that kind of blackmailing. And that's why nobody will leave apart from the unaccompanied minors.' So I guess somehow the compromise that Germany and France and Greece have found. But I think what is so horrible for me is that people, they still don't want to give up on the whole camp approach as such.

CO: And so there are discussions about attempting to rebuild -- make it a facility. We heard the announcements from the European Union that they would assist in some kind of reconstruction of another camp. But local people are blocking any moves even to repair some of the original Moria camp. So how difficult will it be to re-establish those people on the island of Lesbos?

DB: It's very interesting because the refugees or the asylum seekers and the locals are completely of the same opinion. And to not use this and to say, okay, we need to find another solution basically of this policy of deterrents by suffering, by really, you know, making people live in horrible conditions once they enter the European Union, is not working anymore. That cannot be the future. And as you said, locals and refugees alike see that and they are taking action to stop it, because if not, they are the ones who will suffer from this system.

CO: So what does it mean giving up on the camp approach? What will that require the EU member countries to actually do?

DB: The camp approach has some history. There was originally the idea of having a hotspot, which was supposed to be like a European Union co-financed kind of space. But that pretty quickly turned into these camps that were completely overflowing. And somehow we just accepted that. And I think it came from the idea of saying, like, we are afraid of the right-wing populists in our own countries, we don't want to be too welcoming. And so I guess it's just a, I mean, cost that we have to incur that people live in inhumane conditions at the borders in order to deter people from entering. It's an absolutely, I mean, a dumb calculation. And it's dumb because if you're afraid of your right-wing populists, these images of a camp burning are the best that you can do for them. You know the chaos, that's exactly what drives people into extremist positions. You can't try to build a system of deterrence based on suffering where you're trying to match the suffering that people have where they came from. You know, that's not how we're supposed to run an asylum system. What you have to do is to have a good process set up. But you can't think that throughout this process you just put them in a prison that doesn't even have prison standards.

CO: Is there an exit strategy of any kind? Is there a way out of this? Because it's quite clear from a woman we talked to the other night who was out trying to help people, works in an NGO, and was just describing the hostility that the local people were trying to stop these refugees from moving around. What is the exit strategy? What has to happen to end this?

DB: When I think about solutions, there is one immediate thing to do: we need to relocate people to other member states today and tomorrow. That's the first priority. And the second is to think very carefully about what kind of system doesn't institutionalize the systematic kind of camps, systematic suffering, but actually tries to get towards a humane and functioning world. And on the 30th of September, the executive body of the European Union will propose a new pact for asylum and migration. And I just hope that they take some of these lessons and make proposals that do not build on detention centres, on deterrence as the main guiding principle.

CO: All right. We will obviously continue to follow this story Mr. Boeselager. I appreciate speaking with you again tonight. Thank you.

DB: Thank you.

CH: Damian Boeselager is a German MEP and the co-founder of Vault Europa. We reached him today in Berlin.

[Music]

Talkback: Mason Jar Shortage

CH: Last night, many of you let us know that you also can't can. Our guest, Valerie Paton of Prince Edward Island, told us about a mason jar shortage there. And she's not the only one fruitlessly searching for something to canned fruit in. Judy James wrote "Good luck finding those elusive 250 milliliter jars anywhere in downtown Toronto. I scored one today and found myself very lucky. There's nothing else around. On Amazon, I saw one listing for six jars for over 135 dollars. People, please recycle those jars back." We also heard from Talkback.

AUDREY BOYCE: Audrey Boyce. Ottawa. I can relate to the P.E.I and her woes with preserving the jars. Lots and lots of experience of people, I guess preserves to and they don't return the jars. Even though I specifically ask that they to be returned. Those rare persons who do return the jars will get something again next year.

KEN BOUCHARD: Hi, Ken Bouchard in Wakefield, Quebec. Interested in your item on people not being able to find mason jars. And before that, it was toilet paper and flour. Well, now there's a new thing that's hard to get: tulip bulbs. This is a time to plant tulip bulbs. And name stores that usually have them at this time of year, don't have them. Help. Where can I find tulip bulbs?

CH: I don't know Ken. But thanks for calling and thanks to everyone who got in touch. If you have anything you'd like to share, email us at: aih@cbc.ca -- or call Talkback: 416-205-5687 and let us know about the tulip bulbs.

[Music]

Swuggling record

Guest: Bob Evans

CH: A Grolar bear is, of course, a cross between a grizzly and a polar bear. A frienemy is how friend half enemy. And the hamburger is a hamburger burglar. So it only follows naturally that swuggling is exactly what sounds like: swimming while juggling. It's a thing people do. And in the case of Bob Evans, it's a thing he does so expertly. He says he's broken a world record. We reached Mr. Evans in Seaside, Oregon.

CO: Bob, first of all, just how difficult is it to swuggle?

BOB EVANS: It is very difficult to swuggle. The first days of swuggling training were basically just trying not to drown.

CO: Just describe what it's like when you're swuggling. How do you do it?

BE: You are laying on your back and doing flutter kicks like you're doing the backstroke. And thqen instead of the backstroke arms, you have your hands kind of hovering over your face and your just trying to keep five balls up in the air over your face.

CO: Okay. For those who know how to swim or even if you don't, your arms are really necessary when it comes to staying afloat, aren't they?

BE: They are very important. Yes. You're doing double duty with your legs to have enough power to keep your body afloat.

CO: Okay, so not only are you keeping yourself afloat just with flutter kicking, but you are juggling how many balls?

BE: Five balls.

CO: And how many times are you able to do that?

BE: I was able to get 101 catches with five balls while staying afloat and not drowning.

CO: And so this is now a record, right?

BE: It is. Oh, it's pending. I'm compiling all the evidence for Guinness, getting the witness reports, getting the multiple video angles. And it usually takes a few months to become official.

CO: What was the swuggling record that you've broken now?

BE: The previous record was 25 catches.

CO: Wow. So you could have just done 26 and called it a day?

BE: 26 would have done it. But I want to make it harder for the next guy if there is one or girl.

CO: [Laughs] Yes. And that may not happen. So why did you want to be able to break the world record for swuggling?

BE: I love to train. I love to learn. I've always been an athlete. I studied psychology in university. So I'm interested in how people learn. And I love physical challenges. So even if this weren't a record, I would still be doing something to learn something athletic. My job as an elementary PE teacher, the Guinness Book of Records, is a huge deal when you're working with five, six, seven, eight year olds. And so what I always try to do is model healthy living for my students. So every year for the past few years now, I always want to be striving for something.

CO: This is not the only record you have broken. This is a Guinness record you wanted to break. But what are the other things you have done that no one else has?

BE: This is my third official record. Now, the first one that I did was running a mile backwards while juggling three balls. And the second one I did was running a mile forwards but bounce juggling three basketballs.

CO: Wow. And you've also had some other juggling records that are not Guinness World Records, right?

BE: Right. I've unofficially broken the fastest five kilometres running forwards while juggling three balls. And also the fastest 10 kilometres. And my wife, Tricia and I are two of the only three people I believe in the world, maybe four, who have juggled through an entire triathlon -- so it's swimming, biking or uni-cycling and then running. We did three balls for an entire triathlon.

CO: Good. So your wife is a juggler as well?

BE: She is. She's also jugular and a schoolteacher.

CO: What do your kids -- what do your students think of this?

BE: It's amazing how normalized you become to it. Maybe it's for the first few weeks they're impressed when they see their gym teacher lying on the gym floor and juggling five balls over his face and practicing his flutter kicks. But after a while, they do become normalized to it. But I do think it's powerful for them to see their teacher practising and challenging himself and setting a goal and working towards it. At least that's my hope.

CO: Well, I mean, it's really quite something if they think that this is meh -- I want to see you do something more difficult than this. But have any of them tried to juggle and swim at the same time?

BE: I haven't had any swuggling students yet. I've had plenty of students, probably hundreds, if not thousands, that have learned to juggle. For me, some students are now better jugglers than I am, which is awesome. But I don't think anyone has done it in the pool yet.

CO: Have you got an idea, have you got your eye on a record you want to break after this?

BE: It's a little dependent on -- I have two kids at home, I have a two year old and a 10 month old, but my two year old just learned how to ride a two wheel bike. And I'm hoping to go for the longest distance on a unicycle while juggling three objects. I think the current record is 20 kilometres. And I think I can expand that one by quite a bit.

CO: Sounds like you're juggling a lot.

BE: [Chuckles] Juggling a lot, both literally and metaphorically.

CO: Bob it's great to talk to you. Thanks.

BE: Thank you Carol.

CH: Bob Evans recently caught five balls 101 times while swimming. He says it's a record and is waiting on its official approval now. And for more on the story, visit our website: cbc.ca/aih. And just in case that was not enough swuggling for you, it turns out big surprise, we've covered the phenomenon on this very show before. Back in 2013, Carol spoke with self-professed motivational juggler Joe Salter about keeping balls aloft in the water on a bicycle and while attempting to set a world record for fastest backwards marathon while juggling.

JOE SALTER: I'm not much of a faster runner and I'll get beat probably at any distance, but I always go for niches and I'm more of an innovative, creative juggler. So I thought, hey, I can do the backwards one. I got the stubbornness and I'll stick to the goal to get it done. So that's what I was going for.

CO: How long did it take you?

JOE SALTER: I did it in 5 hours and 51 minutes and 25 seconds. Well that's lower than I anticipated, but given the terrain it wasn't exactly the smoothest surfaces in the world on some of those roads. So we really had to kind of inch around a lot of little corners and bumps. And then it was, at the beginning of the first three miles were quite congested, and we were in the middle of a huge pack. So we played it a little safe and I went slower than I probably could have gone at the beginning.

CO: But at least you could always see who is coming up behind you.

BE: [Laughs] Yeah, yeah, that's right. It was fun kind of having that eye contact with a lot of people at the beginning. That was the most kind of surreal part. [Laughter] Was about 200 people coming after you and you're in the middle, juggling.

CH: Motivational juggler Joe Salter speaking with Carol in October 2013.

[Music]

Part 2: Mathematician comes to defence of TikTok teen blasted for saying math isn't real

Divorced parents school tensions

Guest: Melanie O’Neill

CH: A mother says her nine year old son should go back to class in-person. His father feels the COVID risks are too high. Now an Ontario, judge has made the decision for them. It's a scenario that's playing out across the country, causing concern about the impact on already backlogged courts and causing the phones of family lawyers to ring off the hook. Melanie O'Neill is one of those lawyers. She represents the mother in that recent precedent setting case. We reached her in Aurora, Ontario.

CO: Ms. O'Neill, how many calls are you getting about these kinds of disputes between parents, one wanting the child to go to school, another wanting them to stay home and learn?

MELANIE O'NEILL: Definitely getting more than I ever anticipated. So since COVID in general. I've gotten a lot busier with party separating. But now with this issue out there and the confusion about, you know, whether or not it's safe to send children to school, I've definitely gotten a quite a few calls.

CO: I think probably people could understand, even in their own families, the differences of opinion, the splits, the arguments that are going on. The kids might be subjected to hearing some of that. But so different, isn't it, when the parents each are sharing custody and they're not living together as a family? It must be so difficult.

MELANIE O'NEILL: Absolutely. Yes. Different parenting styles, parents with different resources, different careers, different abilities to work from home. Many different factors are going into play here.

CO: So what are you hearing from people? How often are they actually going as far as taking it to court as you did in this case?

MELANIE O'NEILL: Well, the good news is, is that in my practice, ever since this decision was released, I've been able to guide my clients in terms of what the Ontario court is now considering when making these types of decisions. This decision has, I think, prevented a lot of people from having to go to court.

CO: In what way? What has it clarified?

MELANIE O'NEILL: So it's basically clarified the fact that the court is placing a great deal of trust on the Ontario government. So the Ontario government has made it clear that although it's not 100 percent safe for children to return back to school, they believe that it's the benefits of school and in-person school outweigh the risks. And that September 2020 is now the time to to attempt this new normal and have your children back at school.

CO: In this case, Chase versus Chase, the father thought that the child would be subjected to risk going to school because of COVID. He understood the benefits of a child being with their friends and being in that learning environment, but didn't think it was worth the risk. The mother felt that the need to be in that classroom outweighed that risk. Is that right?

MELANIE O'NEILL: That's correct.

CO: And the judge ruled in her favour?

MELANIE O'NEILL: Yes. And it's not as though the mother said that there's no risk out there. The mother is very similar to all of us out there, and even me, myself as a parent is worried about children going back to school. But I think also recognizing that given the particular circumstance of this child and the fact that neither parent nor the child has an underlying medical condition that makes him more adverse, susceptible to the adverse effects of COVID-19, then that was you know, that was her decision.

CO: And there are cases, other cases where that was decided the child shouldn't go to school because there was someone in the family with immune system problems, that it was a bigger risk for that family. Is that not the case?

MELANIE O'NEILL: That's correct in Quebec. So the Chase and Chase case was the first case in Ontario. There were two cases before that in Quebec. And the judge in one of those cases ruled that, yes, there was a parent with an immune compromised condition. And in that case, it was ruled that the child stayed home for remote learning.

CO: So Judge Himel decided that we can trust the Ontario government, they're making a decision to have kids go back to school based on research and science -- and that's all solid. What happens if that changes? What happens if they are wrong about that and we see a surge of cases in schools? All those assumptions, do they get tossed out the window and you got these cases again?

MELANIE O'NEILL: Well, that's a good question. So what Justice Himel did say is that the government was quick to close all schools in March. And Justice Himel also notes that the government has made it clear that they will do so again should the risk be there.

CO: The judge also has this other part of her judgment which is really quite interesting. She said that for some separated and divorced parents, this is another battleground, referring to the situation with COVID-19 -- 'It's one more arena where their child may become the prisoner of the war.' What do you make of that?

MELANIE O'NEILL: Well, that was a powerful statement, and unfortunately that is the case for a lot of parents that are having to use the court to resolve their issues. And I can speak just from this case and knowing this parents, I would agree that Justice Himel was correct in stating that with respect to this family. I think this was a decision that had no middle ground. There was no option for okay the child stays at home for two days and then does remote learning for three days. It was either your child's all in or all out. So court was the only option. And I would assume that the child wasn't aware of what's going on. That's why this was also deemed an urgent matter, because they didn't want the child to approach school and have his friends at school or that conversation going around and him not knowing where he's at. So I think by handling this before the school started, it hopefully insulated the child from conflict between the parents.

CO: The father thought that going to school wearing a mask -- he's in French immersion -- it would limit his ability to communicate, plus, subjecting him to possible disease. The mother said, though, he has to be in that environment. Do you think that these kinds of discussions -- are these what are playing out in everyone's homes right now?

MELANIE O'NEILL: I wouldn't say in everyone's home. But I think there's definitely concerns out there about children wearing masks. In this situation the child is nine, so he'll probably be in grade four or grade five and he will have to wear a mask. I just know in my own personal experience, my children both at school. But there are some parents that don't want their children to wear masks, so they're not sending them to school.

CO: Right. So that's the decisions because of the mask.

MELANIE O'NEILL: Exactly. Exactly.

CO: It's all so difficult. Ms. O'Neill I appreciate speaking with you. Thank you.

MELANIE O'NEILL: No problem.

CH: Melanie O'Neill is a family lawyer. She is in Aurora, Ontario.

[Music]

Justin Trudeau

CH: If Justin Trudeau is feeling guilty about the demise of the We Charity, he wasn't showing it in Gogama, Ontario today. The prime minister joined Ontario Premier Doug Ford there for the groundbreaking of a new gold mine. Reporters took the opportunity to ask Mr. Trudeau if he took any responsibility for the decision of We's founders to wind up their Canadian operations. The decision comes amidst investigations into their ties to Mr. Trudeau and his team, and after the government's initial decision to have We run its big student grants program. Here's what Justin Trudeau had to say.

JUSTIN TRUDEAU: From the beginning of this pandemic, we made a decision to move quickly to support Canadians. We broke bureaucratic records in getting the Canada Emergency Response Benefit out to Canadians who needed it in record time. We move forward with the wage subsidy to help businesses keep people on their workforce on the payroll. And yes, we moved very quickly to try and support young people with a range of different measures. What we tried to do with the Canada student grant was encourage young people to volunteer in communities across this country as they were, and give them recognition for that. And in order to do that, we moved rapidly with a partner that we felt was able to actually deliver it. Obviously the way it ended up working out was really unfortunate for everyone involved, particularly for the students who didn't get those grants over the course of the summer for the volunteer work and the community work they were doing in the summer. As I said, I regret not having recused myself in the beginning because of the perception involved. But there was no conflict of interest here. And as a government, we will continue to work extremely hard to support our young people through this pandemic, even as they continue to step up in communities across this country to help us get through this COVID-19 crisis.

CH: Prime Minister Trudeau speaking to reporters in Gogama, Ontario today.

[Music]

TikTok math explaining

Guest: Eugenia Cheng

CH: Last month, high schooler Gracie Cunningham posted a video on TikTok. She had some math questions, not just about quadratic equations, though. She had questions about how math works and how we know it's real. She then posted a second video with some questions raised by her first one.

GRACIE CUNNINGHAM: Hi, folks. I'd like to redo my TikTok about how math is not real. And I would like to be smart this time [chuckles] because I didn't know that was going to go viral. My first question is, how did people know what they were looking for when they started theorizing about formulas? Because I wouldn't know what to look for if I'm making up math. Question number two, once they did find these formulas, how did they know that they were right? Because how? Number three, why is everyone being really mean to me on Twitter? [Chuckles]

CH: Gracie got a lot of online hate for her curiosity. People called her dumb for asking about math that way. And that's when mathematicians like Eugenia Cheng jumped to her defense. Ms. Cheng is an academic who's written several books on mathematics. She responded to Gracie online to say her questions were great and then proceeded to answer them in a detailed two page reply on Twitter. We reached Eugenia Cheng in Chicago.

CO: Eugenia, as you know, there was a lot of reaction to that post by Gracie Cunningham that we'll get into that. But when you heard her ask the questions about math, what did you hear in those questions?

EUGENIA CHENG: I heard someone who was posing really valid, curious questions, and I really sympathized with her because those are questions that are important to mathematics, but they're typically not addressed in normal math education. And moreover, they're exactly the kinds of questions that cause some people to feel superior and tell others that they are stupid for asking those questions. And that makes me upset.

CO: And that is exactly what happened to Gracie Cunningham. She thought she was just doing a TikTok for some, I guess, her friends and for her followers, and then it went viral. She had some really horrible responses, including people saying that it was just dumb, it was stupid. But you didn't react that way to her, did you?

EC: No, I didn't think that the questions were dumb. And it made me want to do something about it because I saw it as part of a much larger picture. It's a very universal experience that many people unfortunately put off math by having their questions belittled, and it makes them want to go and do something else. But also it's part of a broader picture of people, especially men wanting to call younger women stupid and wanting to put themselves in a position of superiority over them. So I wanted to do something to try and counteract that effect.

CO: You did respond to her in a two page reply. Very detailed. But I wonder, just some broad strokes what you told Gracie and answered the questions. She says 'math doesn't seem real, how do people know what they're looking for? And when you find those formulas, how do you know that they're right?' So what did you say to her?

EC: I really wanted to validate her questions as profound questions that are difficult to answer in research mathematics. They are exactly the kinds of questions that drive mathematicians to do research and specifically an answer to the questions. I try to describe how mathematicians come up with those ideas by seeing similarities in different aspects of life. Whereas if math is taught to her out of context, with no real life experience leading to it, and it does seem very weird and implausible that anyone should come up with it. And most importantly, I thought her question about how you know it's right is so to the point, especially in this divisive political era, because so many people jump to conclusions or cling onto things that they think are right without really understanding any thought process that leads up to it. And that's the key to why mathematics is a powerful subject. The logical framework that leads to us deciding things are right.

CO: What do you say to the questions as to why do we bother -- Why should she have to learn algebra or math? What's the point?

EC: A lot of people do wonder that. And for me, it's about how many different ways to establish what counts as good information, because otherwise we're open to being manipulated into thinking certain things. To me, every academic discipline gives us one point of view for how to understand what truth really is. And mathematics is one of those points of view.

CO: We know that for some people, the whole idea of math and algebra is just a lot of fun. They love to solve puzzles. Others break into a ice cold sweat just at the thought of doing math. And it often comes down to having a good teacher. Do you think that a lot of people, especially girls, don't get the kinds of teachers they need, a teacher probably like you who can tell them why they should bother and just to help them understand math?

EC: Yes, I think many people give credit to a wonderful teacher they had at some point. But I do want to say it's often not a teacher's fault. Teachers are trying really hard to educate people in the best way that they can, and often their hands are really tied by the system that has been imposed on them. So it's not really necessarily the teacher's fault. Plus, the questions that children and teenagers can ask about math may sound naive, but they're really deep and extremely difficult to answer. And I think that we need to encourage people to respect questions that can't be answered rather than making people feel stupid for being unable to answer those questions. And I'm sad that we live in a world where absolute knowledge is revered and being able to do tests quickly is something that is such a big part of education.

CO: You had a lot of response to your own posts back to Gracie, some of it quite emotional. Can you tell me a bit about that?

EC: Yeah, I was really overwhelmed by how many adult male and female wrote to me to say that they were crying from reading my responses because they felt such a deep level of validation for all the trauma they went through when they were a child, where they were asking those questions and they were told that they were stupid questions and they weren't really encouraged to ask those questions. And this really touched me and galvanized me because I really believe we need to do education better. If that is the result of what we're doing in education, we're really not doing it right.

CO: And isn't it, in fact, having an inquiring mind? That is exactly what you're trying to get out with, learning math, to solve problems and find out the unknown.

EC: Yes. Having an inquiring mind and importantly, wanting to have a good framework and basis for the conclusions that you draw. As Gracie said in her first video, why does y = mx + b? Why is that the equation for the straight line? And some people go, well, it's obvious. And that's not a good, logical way of thinking. It may seem obvious to you, but that's a big problem that we have at the moment with some people just jumping up and going, well, this is obviously the case and someone else going know it obviously isn't. And then we don't really get anywhere in our conversations.

CO: What do you hope people take away from this conversation you've had with Gracie?

EC: I hope that many people who have previously felt put off by math see that their questions were actually valid. And I hope that the people who were put off see that the people who don't pose those questions aren't necessarily better at math than them. If no one else is asking those questions around you, you can sit there going, oh, no, I must be really stupid. I'm hoping that I can convey the fact that actually posing those questions makes it look to me like you're thinking more like a real mathematician.

CO: Eugenia, it's great to talk to you. Thank you.

EC: Thank you very much.

CH: Eugenia Cheng is a mathematician and author. We reached her in Chicago. And you can find more on the story on our website: cbc.ca/aih.

[Music]

Free Jazz

CH: Even by the unbelievably low standards of racist far-right figures, Danish politician Rasmus Paludan is awful. He's the head of Denmark's Hard Line party. He's been convicted of and jailed for racism. He has one schtick, Islamophobia, and he has one stunt burning Qurans. Obviously, it's deeply offensive, but it's also deeply unimaginative. He's like a terrible band that has just one terrible song. Whereas his most powerful opponents are also like a terrible band, but with unlimited terrible songs. [Brass instrument being played randomly]

CH: This is the musical collective Free Jazz Against Paludan. Since May, wherever in Denmark Rasmus Paludan goes, musicians show up en masse to honk and clang at him. There's only one condition to be part of the group: play loudly. Ideally, loudly enough to drown out Mr. Paludan's ignorant ramblings. On Facebook the Free Jazz Against Paludan page makes its all-inclusive message clear, well almost all inclusive. The page reads: "Our purpose is to accompany racism convicted Rasmus Paludan around the country with free jazz accompaniments and improvizations. Anyone can join with the exception of just him. He cannot." In a statement to Vice News, Mr. Paludan griped the music is an illegal disturbance of a legal demonstration. He's as wrong about that as he is about everything else. It's perfectly legal. And if he's going to trumpet his awful takes, then he's going to have to take some awful trumpet.

[Music]

Grant Hatcher

CH: The idea of being surrounded by the ocean while camping sounds idyllic. And it's exactly the scenario Grant Hatcher found himself in a few weeks ago. But he wouldn't use the word idyllic. Mr. Hatcher took off from Halifax to Cape Breton on his motorcycle. But he got a late start that day, so he decided to pitch a tent at the halfway mark on the shores of Cobequid Bay, which flows into the Bay of Fundy. Here's Grant Hatcher telling the rest of the story to the CBC's Maritime Noon yesterday.

GRANT HATCHER: Well, when I first got there, it all seemed okay. But there were some suspicious signs that maybe it wasn't the best place to set up a tent. But like you said, it was late, it was raining a little bit. So I was kind of desperate and kind of in a pinch to set it all up there.

BOB MURPHY: Okay so these signs, these red flags -- what were you seeing?

GRANT HATCHER: So I pulled the bike over on the side of the road. And I can tell on the other side of the road that that was where the ocean lies. And you can kind of see it in the far distance. But there was nothing but grass, which is the perfect place, you know, to set up a tent. But the first red flag was that all the grass is very flat. So imagine knee high, almost waist high beach grass, but it was all completely flat on the ground as far as I could see. But as I was walking around, red flag number two was that the grass was really, really squishy beneath my feet, kind of soggy and squishy. But, you know, I was like "ah it rained a little bit earlier." Partly why I wanted to set up so quick was that there was a little trickle in there too. And red flag number three, I decided to touch the grass and just lick my fingers just to see. And it was very very salty. [Chuckles] But that's where I set my tent up.

BOB MURPHY: All right. So you set your tent up. It's dark, as we say. You hunker down. When did you know something wasn't right?

GRANT HATCHER: I got woken up by a dew drop that fell from the top of my tent, literally hit me right in the center, the floor head. So I just turned over on my side to readjust my position. And that was the exact moment I realized something was really, really, really off. The only way I could explain the sensation is my aunt had a waterbed back in the 90s or something like that -- and that's literally what it felt like. I was in this tent, but I was clearly floating on water and it was kind of pure panic there for a second because I didn't peg the tent down. So I was thinking: "Am I halfway to P.E.I right now? What's happening? Where am I? Like, where am I at?

BOB MURPHY: Did you venture to zip open the tent and take a look or what happened?

GRANT HATCHER: I did. I did. I got there. But before I got there, when I sat up the way to my body sunk down in the water a bit. And I could just feel my bum sort of just bounce off the bottom of the ocean floor. So that moment panic sort of subsided.

BOB MURPHY: You all stay together up all your clothes, right?

GRANT HATCHER: [Chuckles] Yes. All my clothes were in my backpack. And I am the person who sleeps naked. So I was naked at the time.

BOB MURPHY: Just adds to your predicament, doesn't it?

GRANT HATCHER: [Laughs] Yes, it does. It's just like one layer of the story, it just keeps getting better and better. So I unzip the tent. The moment I move to go close to the entrance to the door, the door dips below the level of the sea and instantly the Cobequid Bay fills my entire tent with ocean water. It wasn't a wave, but it just [makes wave sound] filled up the whole tent. My only option is that I just need to get someplace warm and dry. So I need to get to Truro and just find a hotel. And it was a 45 minute drive in the middle of the night. I'm soaked to the bone. And it was probably the longest drive of my entire life until I finally came to the Comfort Inn.

CH: That was Grant Hatcher speaking to Maritime Noon host Bob Murphy about how he accidentally floated toward the Atlantic Ocean while sleeping in his tent last month.

[Music]

Part 3: Wind-powered cargo ship

Wind-powered cargo ship

Guest: Per Tunell

CH: For more than 100 years, engines have been propelling cargo ships around the world. And every day those engines use thousands of tons of fossil fuels. Now, after that century plus a team from Sweden has an idea to change that. They've announced plans to create the world's largest wind powered cargo ship. She's called The Oceanbird. Per Tunell is the chief operating officer of Wallenius Marine, the ship design firm leading the project. We've reached him in Stockholm.

CO: Mr. Tunell, I'm looking at a picture of this craft, The Oceanbird. It's extraordinary looking. And I don't think I could do justice to describing it. Could you do that for us?

PER TUNELL: I will certainly try. It's quite difficult, actually, to describe it because it looks like nothing you've seen before. But if you try to imagine it 200 metres long, 40 metres wide and 20 metres high above the water, you try to imagine a vessel like that. And then you streamline it as much as you can. Make it very aerodynamic in the shape. And then you put five wings, 80 metre wings on top of it. That's The Oceanbird.

CO: These wings are the sails. Can you describe them? Because that's the really the most startling thing about it. They just look so extraordinary.

PT: They are. These are wings. They are 80 metre high. They are going to be retractable. So we can kind of de-power when the wind is too high or so. So there are five of these wings and they're going to be able to rotate 360 degrees, follow the wind if we need to. And to be able also to sheet that these wings for different wind angles.

CO: When you call them wings, they kind of function as sails, don't they? But they don't look like sails. They are not made of cloth. Maybe describe the material of these things.

PT: Exactly, they are not made by class of fabrics because that would not be durable enough. These vessels are going to sail 250 or 270 days to a year. That's not going to be durable enough. So these wings are made of mostly steel, but also composite. It's kind of a rigid solution, a rigid wing. Imagine an airplane wing. But these wings are symmetrical and airplane wing as symmetrical because it's only producing [inaudible] one direction.

CO: People who sail, who do boating I'm sure are going to their computers right now to take a look at this extraordinary thing. But what is the advantage of having this? Because I'm sure it's not cheap to make this boat.

PT: It's not cheap to make it. It's not going to be tremendously expensive. But the main thing here is that we as a company have made our decision that we're going to lead the way to what's truly sustainable shipping. The emissions from shipping today is tremendous. It's a lot. So we cannot continue like that. So we need to make a solution so we can continue the shipping, the shipping is an important part of the society today, but without these emissions. So the starting point for this project was to be able to run a vessel with 90 percent less emissions compared to today's best in class vessels. And that is what we are aiming at.

CO: The picture that I can see is normally when you see a ship, you see containers on top, you see the cargo. But there's nothing there -- you can't see anything. Will this ship be able to carry the amount of cargo that other ships do?

PT: On a car carrier, which is this is, this is a car carrier -- a ro-ro ship. You normally don't see the cargo. It's a closed ship. We are starting with a car carrier. That's the ship type we're starting with because that's where we have our most of our expertise, but we are thinking of extending this to other ship types and other segments as well.

CO: Right. But it would be cheaper because of not using any fuel or very little because you still have to have engines to go in and out of harbours, I'm sure. But as far as the length of time, it takes longer, doesn't it? So will that discourage shippers from getting involved in this kind of technology? Because they tend to want to have these things move rather quickly.

PT: We thought that would be a big challenge in the beginning, because this is mostly -- there a lot of technical challenges in this project, of course. But we were thinking and I think still think one of the most biggest challenges is commercial. Yes, it will be a little bit slower, but we can ensure that we have a schedule speed about 10 knots -- slightly about 10 knots. So crossing over the Atlantic, for example, would take us about 12 days instead of today's maybe eight days. We were afraid that this is going to be a little bit of a challenge to our customers or to the cargo owners. But the dialogs we've had so far shows that the most important thing for the cargo owners is that, you know, when it's coming. So the speed is not the most crucial thing. But the commitment that if we say that the vessel is coming in twelve days and it comes in twelve days, that's okay. But if we say it comes in twelve days, and then it comes in 14 days -- that's of course not okay. Speed is not a crucial thing. It's also important. But the reliability of the schedule is more important.

CO: But isn't the whole problem with sailboats is that you can't really predict how long -- if it depends on wind, then you can't be absolutely certain, can you? I mean, you said that the sails are retractable, these wings are. But too much wind, not enough wind. I mean, these things can have a serious effect on your ability to get there, are they not?

PT: That is right. And that's why we have an axillary engine. It's going to be an engine installed. So when the wind is unfavourable, we can start up the engine and run the vessel through engine. So there might be a voyage where we utilize the engine more and there will be voyages just where we're practically not even start up the engine until we come to port. We have done simulations of thousands of these voyages and we see that we can still on an average base be about 90 percent reduction of the emissions.

CO: Okay, so 90 percent reduction overall of different kinds of crossings, not necessarily each one, because some of them, you're going to end up using fuel.

PT: Exactly.

CO: And so the plan for The Oceanbird to set sail in 2024 -- are you sure that it's completely seaworthy? Has anyone done a crossing yet?

PT: We haven't tested it of course. We haven't built it yet. But we are doing tests now in smallscale. So we built a seven metre model. One of the critical things to the listing, the heel of the vessel, which is what one could think if you know that the sailing boat kind of heals quite a lot when the wind is strong. But this vessel, even without any sort of compensation, it will never heal more than five degrees.

CO: Well, we'll be watching to see The Oceanbird set sail. And I appreciate speaking with you.

PT: [Chuckles] Please do. Thank you so much.

CH: Per Tunell is the chief operating officer of Wallenius Marine. His company is part of a Swedish consortium that announced plans to build the world's largest wind powered cargo ship. We reached Mr. Tunell in Stockholm.

[Music]

Kori Sidaway

CH: When Kori Sidaway opens her email recently, her jaw dropped. The reporter and anchor with Chek News in British Columbia says a viewer wrote in to comment on her appearance after Sunday night's broadcast. The email, signed by the Vancouver Island Cleavage Patrol, included a picture of Ms. Sidaway from TV that night, as well as a photo of a woman wearing a deep-v top. The email read, quote, "What do you think we see and what we actually see?" Kori Sidaway posted the email to Twitter, and now she says she's been overwhelmed by support. She told the CBC about her decision to make this public.

KORI SIDAWAY: I just kind of had enough. We have conversations in the newsroom, helping each other out you know, when these situations do arise. You know, supporting my other female colleagues through similar situations. And it's talked internally quite often. But I just didn't want to sit in the shame, I didn't want to internalize the harassment. So I decided to repurpose the photo into something powerful because I think I do look powerful. I think I look fabulous. I think I look professional. I think there's nothing wrong with that photo.

BRIDGETTE WATSON: And so you've received messages not to this extent, but with the same type of messaging, I would say in the past. And so what made this one be the one you went public with?

KORI SIDAWAY: I think it was my frustration that I am now responsible for people's imagination. But not only am I responsible for the work I do, the clothes that I do wear, but I'm now responsible for conjuring up whatever I do conjure up in their imagination. Like that, to me, just seems so far fetched. I don't think a body part of mine had been kind of highlighted in this way specifically before. And I typically dress like very conservatively on air and I'm very conscious of every part that I fell. Like, I don't show my arms on TV. Like, I just don't feel comfortable with that. That's a personal choice that I make. So I think like just being more exploratory being two years in and stuff like that. So wearing a v-neck doesn't seem like earth shattering. But I think for me, I felt like -- I don't think that that was a boundary push at all. But for me, it was like settling into like, okay, I can wear these things and finally getting comfortable in the clothes that I'm wearing and choosing to wear. And suddenly someone was coming after me telling me I was inappropriate.

BRIDGETTE WATSON: You know, you're fairly freshly industry to year -- two years. You're just starting to feel very comfortable in who you are and your presence and how you present on television. And you did assert your power in this situation. But when it comes down to it right now, before you're going on air, are you going to have hesitation and nerves around your outfit?

KORI SIDAWAY: I want to say, no, this is not going to affect me going forward, and I truly will try to be that -- sorry -- I will try really hard to not let it seep into my choices. But at the end of the day, I think there might be a nagging -- a little something now nagging behind my decision. Not to say they'll change anything, but it'll be there. They'll be there. But that being said, I'm ready to wear this outfit again and I'm going to wear this outfit again on Saturday.

CH: That was BC news anchor Kori Sidaway speaking with the CBC's Bridgette Watson.

[Music]

Ben Davidson

CH: Ben Davidson didn't just shape his materials. He was also shaping the future of Haida Art. So it came as a terrible shock to loved ones last month when Ben Davidson died of a heart attack at the age of 44. His Haida name was Tlajang nang kingaas, which means the one who is known far away. Because his artwork is in galleries and private collections around the world. From cedar masks to delicate jewelry, metal paint and paper creations and monumental totem poles, Mr. Davidson was a carver who was carving out a unique niche. Here's Ben Davidson in 2014, speaking on the CBC's Daybreak North about a totem pole he made for Stollery Children's Hospital in Edmonton.

BEN DAVIDSON: A young girl passed away last year where I live. I wanted to put a bit more meaning into this project. And I asked the parents of this young girl if I could honour her through this pole. And they said for sure. So they helped me get some ideas for the design of the pole. And then during the process, they also asked if they could put some of her ashes in the paint. So I actually had them mix it into the black and they helped paint parts of the pole. They've been reassuring me because I keep asking them to make sure it's okay what we're doing and they're very honoured to have these things sort of memorialize their daughter's life.

FAITH FUNDAL: Now, of course, you have carved this pole. What does it look like?

BEN DAVIDSON: Well, it's a 10 foot totem pole. And when I was asking for design ideas, I talked to the parents and they said birds and butterflies were her favourite things. So it's got an eagle on top. It'll have three small butterflies that were designed and made by parents who lost children, that will be put on in different spots of the pole. But the main figure is a bear mother and a cub, which sort of symbolizes the bond between a parent and child. And then on the bottom, I put a bison and that's to honour it's going to Alberta, so it's not Haida territory, so I just put that on there to honour where it's going.

CH: That was Ben Davidson with CBC's Daybreak North host Faith Fundal in 2014. Ben's father and teacher is the legendary Haida artist Robert Davidson, also known as Guud San Glans. He spoke with Daybreak North about what made him proud to be Ben's father.

ROBERT DAVIDSON: His dedication to all facets of life from re-learning our history, learning about the classical period of Haida art, and being a really good father and also a very good friend and a great ally to the recovery that we're working on after being silenced for so many generations.

FAITH FUNDAL: When did you start to notice that passion in Ben? I mean, you've been an artist your entire life.

ROBERT DAVIDSON: It wasn't the moment -- Sara and Ben would be, I would have them in my studio. Sara would be busy drawing. And later on, when Ben arrived and he anchored a piece of wood -- and I gave him one tool and he would just practice. He would just carve. Later on, after high school, I was a bit shy to ask him if he would apprentice with me. And he was also in the same boat and he asked Sara, his sister, to ask me if you could apprentice with me. And I was so tickled just beyond words. It's something I wanted so badly for him to carry on. I thought of him as the next generation to carry the torch. But even so, I thought of him as an equal. His work was so advanced for his age. I remember several years ago, I can't remember, about 10 years ago I said to him that his work far surpasses mine. My wish is that the momentum that he has created will be carried on -- that we don't lose what he has created. And his work will shine, as it shines today, for generations.

CH: Robert Davidson with CBC host Faith Fundal this week. Mr. Davidson is the father of Haida carver, Ben Davidson, who died of a heart attack last month on Haida Gwaii. He was 44 years old.

[Music]

Vancouver Island caves

Guest: Martin Davis

CH: It's tiny, translucent, multi-legged and shrimp-like. If anything, it seems slightly gross. But the rare crustacean lives in limestone caves near Tahsis, a village on Vancouver Island. And that's what makes the amphipods so special. Special enough that it recently accomplished something that conservationists have been trying to accomplish for decades: to protect a large swath of old forest on top of a network of important caves called Karst Caves. Martin Davis is the Mayor of Tahsis who's been fighting for this protection for years. We reached him in Tahsis, British Columbia.

CO: Martin, can you describe these little creatures?

MARTIN DAVIS: Sure, they're white. They're about five to seven millimetres long. They're blind and they're only found in pools and streams and caves on Vancouver Island and the Alaska Panhandle.

CO: But they've made a very big splash, haven't they? Why are they deemed so important enough to protect their habitat?

MD: Well, because they're probably a relict population. They're probably leftover from the glaciations. And we're speculating that's how they're distributed widely across the island in these alpine caves. And this is the only environment that they are found in. And when that environment is disturbed, such as development or logging on the surface, that can change the flow regimes and the ph of the water, and it could potentially wipe them out. So we've been looking to conserve them for many years since they were first found there. They're first described in 1974, actually.

CO: And you've made the case before that the habitat should be protected. But was this the creature, the animal you thought might actually save this cave system?

MD: Well, it's a bit ironic because actually my main focus is that research. For years I've been studying bats and their use of caves in B.C.. And one time we were trying to preserve multi-species bat hibernacula. And there was a particular bat called Keen's Myotis, which has since been declassified as a species. But we've used that as arguments to conserve bat habitat. The old growth forest above it. But it turns out the government was quite interested in this amphipods. And this particular case there are scientific rationale, I'm not sure. I don't completely understand. But I did lead a group into there a few years ago -- a dangerous species specialists from the government, a logging company representative, a couple of other people. And we actually saw these on site in the area which we've since had set aside.

CO: Wow, you've seen these little creatures in their situation.

MD: Mm hmm. Yeah. They're a bit hard to spot because they're so small, but they kind of [inaudible] around in the water. And as soon as they see your light, they go and hide under rock. So they're quite difficult to collect originally, but they've been since found from probably 10 different sites around Vancouver Island, all in cave.

CO: Can you describe their cave system, where you find them, and just why this whole area is so special?

MD: Well, this particular area, it was partially impacted in the path. They were logging around there in the 70s and we found entrances filled up with rocks and flash and debris. And we're seeing a lot of damage from it. But there's still extensive old growth forests in the area and multiple cave systems. They all originate from this one particular mountain. And you don't see any water going underground. It's just straight into the sinkholes and the snowmelt at the top. And then it spreads out. It runs out in different directions, down different ridges. And eventually you'll see springs coming out. But this is one of the habitats of this amphipod are these caves. This particular cave is quite deep. I'm not actually sure the depth because they found a new entrance a few years ago, it is close to 500 metres deep and about eight and a half kilometres long, the main cave. And that's only one of the system.

CO: And what are the industries that were interested in actually developing the area around these caves?

MD: It's tree farm license 19, Western Forest Products. So they have the license to log in the area. And in the last few years, I've worked closely with them and our ministry of environment regarding this area and brought to their attention the significance of this area and the potential impacts that they log. It's also very rugged terrain. It's karst terrain. It's limestone that gets dissolved by rainfall. There's sinkholes everywhere. And it would be it would be quite hazardous terrain to log anyway. So it wasn't too hard to make the argument. And we were also consulting with the local First Nations, the Mowachaht/Muchalaht, and they were definitely on side with us, too. So that was also a big help and answered our arguments for preserving the area.

CO: So you've worked a long time to have this preserved. You're also the Mayor of Tahsis. And so for you, though, this has been a personal campaign, hasn't it?

MD: Yeah. Well, I guess I've been an environmentalist all my life. I've been fighting to save caves for many years. And this is just one of my latest successes. They haven't all been successes. I mean, we've seen some damage done to the caves and in some cases entrances have been completely blocked. Like there's one up behind my house here in Tahsis that was blocked in the 80s. And I've been trying to get the logging company to reopen it ever since. It used to be the deepest cave on the island at 100 metres deep, but it's blocked with rocks.

CO: Now, meanwhile, you have been able to spare this Quatsino Cave amphipod and its habitat. But what about the other creatures? Do you think this is good news also for those bats you worried about?

MD: Oh, absolutely. There's at least three species of bats that use these caves for hibernation, and it's very important that the caves don't get damaged. Another way they get damaged is when they are blasting roads in these areas, especially during the hibernation season. And they can do harm to the bats just through the impact through the rock and knocking them off the ceilings, that sort of thing. So that's also a consideration.

CO: All right. We'll leave it there. Thanks Martin.

MD: Okay, thanks very much.

CH: Martin Davis is the Mayor of Tahsis, B.C.. That's where we reached him.

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

September 11, 2020 Episode Transcript

Social Sharing

More from this episode