Save The Prairie Shelterbelt Program

Signatures 301 total

Page: « ‹ 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 › »

1. 101
   Name: Darrell Stokes on May 3, 2012

   Comments: Should be an essential service

   Flag
2. 102
   Name: James Deleff on May 3, 2012

   Comments: I think that it is just the most stupid idea that the govt has ever done . I ordered trees last fall but was told they could not supply now what are producers suppose to do. The govt spent billions of canadian dollars on the stimulas program now they figure that they the govt should axe the tree program. We need to keep this program going .

   Flag
3. 103
   Name: Qiang Hong on May 3, 2012

   Comments:

   Flag
4. 104
   Name: Tina Martin on May 3, 2012

   Comments: we need trees and the jobs it provides! ESP for towns

   Flag
5. 105
   Name: Jeff Serson on May 3, 2012

   Comments: there is too much stripping of the land now. if you make farmers pay for trees they will never plant them

   Flag
6. 106
   Name: Gilbert Ferre on May 3, 2012

   Comments: The PFRA helped us with the shelterbelt we planted on our farm in 2003. This service is not a cost to the Canadian taxpayer but a grat help in rejunevating the praiie landscape and creating valuable shelter for wildlife .The demise proposed by the current federal government is nothing short of a travesty being imposed on the Canadian public.

   Flag
7. 107
   Name: Li Zhang on May 3, 2012

   Comments:

   Flag
8. 108
   Name: Jill Clark on May 3, 2012

   Comments:

   Flag
9. 109
   Name: Ashton Kaczur on May 3, 2012

   Comments:

   Flag
10. 110
    Name: Sid Sikorski on May 3, 2012

    Comments: If it ain't broke - don't try to fix it!

    Flag
11. 111
    Name: Naomi Beingessner on May 3, 2012

    Comments: This is still a very relevant program, especially as the prairies faces flooding and drought.

    Flag
12. 112
    Name: Helen Rud on May 3, 2012

    Comments: The land in rural southern Saskatchewan is semi-arid and flat; shelter belts are the best way to prevent wind erosion. What else is going to stop the 60km/h winds from blasting the soil???

    Flag
13. 113
    Name: Dan Holbrow on May 3, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
14. 114
    Name: Cathy Holtslander on May 3, 2012

    Comments: Shelterbelts are needed now more than ever. Trees will buffer the climate as we enter a period of greater unpredictability. Trees will save our soil from wind and water erosion. Shelterbelts are also havens of biodiversity for many lifeforms that make up the web of life and keep our ecosystem healthy. The shelterbelt program is an all-around winner. Lets keep it going!

    Flag
15. 115
    Name: Will Oddie on May 3, 2012

    Comments: I am greatly disappointed by the decision to close the Shelterbelt Centre. It is ill-conceived and short-sighted. While it may have initially been started for stopping soil erosion, it serves a much larger service currently, including the provision of tree for farmsteads and riparian areas. For Minister Ritz to dismiss program in such as cavalier manner indicates how thoroughly out of touch the government is on this issue. I would like to see this decision reversed. Will Oddie

    Flag
16. 116
    Name: Nancy Stoeber on May 3, 2012

    Comments: We need to maintain this program.

    Flag
17. 117
    Name: Nettie Wiebe on May 3, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
18. 118
    Name: Karlah Rae Rudolph on May 3, 2012

    Comments: This is a tremendous mistake. The public services provided by trees simply cannot be met through private means.

    Flag
19. 119
    Name: Brenda Barritt on May 3, 2012

    Comments: As someone who grew up on a farm in east central Alberta and saw her father plant shelter belts - - now taking on our own farm, trees are an essential part of how we shape and work with our land. It seems crazy to me that as people are now talking about valuing our ecosystems and even paying farmers for the ecological goods and services we conserve, that this program - one of the very few that help us do that - is cut.

    Flag
20. 120
    Name: Brandy Gray on May 3, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
21. 121
    Name: Marc Krause on May 3, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
22. 122
    Name: Kimberley Reiter on May 3, 2012

    Comments: it is truly a shame that this has happened. Along with farmers and reclamation sites that will be affected by this I know many good people that will be out of a job

    Flag
23. 123
    Name: Paula Anderson on May 3, 2012

    Comments: Short-sighted, eco-unfriendly, stupid.

    Flag
24. 124
    Name: Michelle Strekies on May 4, 2012

    Comments: This is an amazing institution with incredible environmental focus. And I know this first hand, as I did an 8 month internship there. The dedication and workers are phenominal, and the goal for a greener world is extraordinary. And with the amount of pollution we are pumping into our atmosphere, we are going to need all the help we can get. Cutting this program is just one more step to our environment's downfall, and its amazing how little our government cares. Keep the PSP alive.

    Flag
25. 125
    Name: Christina on May 4, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
26. 126
    Name: Josh Brown on May 4, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
27. 127
    Name: April Strekies on May 4, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
28. 128
    Name: Edwin Wallace on May 4, 2012

    Comments: I certainly believe the nursery should be preserved as a publicly owned facility and I soundly condemn the Tories for reckless destruction of our traditional institutions including the CWB and strong unions.

    Flag
29. 129
    Name: Mervin Watson on May 4, 2012

    Comments: We will miss the windbreaks . The carbon dioxcide removal Perhaps the MP's should take a little cut in pay so we can keep this worthwhile industry

    Flag
30. 130
    Name: Brenden Wallace on May 4, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
31. 131
    Name: Scott Francis on May 4, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
32. 132
    Name: Josh Herauf on May 4, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
33. 133
    Name: Darlene Kozey on May 4, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
34. 134
    Name: Tyler Gingras on May 4, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
35. 135
    Name: Kevin McIntyre on May 4, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
36. 136
    Name: April Reeves on May 4, 2012

    Comments: The Shelterbelt Program is one of the most useful to date. Easy for a Prime Minister to sit in an ivory tower and bark commands to dump it: live on these lands and you'll understand. Unless you're not concerned about the planet you will leave behind...

    Flag
37. 137
    Name: Jason Schaeffer on May 4, 2012

    Comments: This is definatly something that needs to be stopped. We need more trees to be plantednot less.

    Flag
38. 138
    Name: Nabila on May 4, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
39. 139
    Name: Andrew Hasenhundl on May 4, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
40. 140
    Name: Marlene De Graaf on May 4, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
41. 141
    Name: Dixie Green on May 4, 2012

    Comments: This program is still needed.

    Flag
42. 142
    Name: Chad Wyatt on May 4, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
43. 143
    Name: Lester Brickley on May 4, 2012

    Comments: the praire shelter blet program provides a great service in assisting farmers in establishing shelterblets around yards, and for cattle shelter for feeding in the winter. Also farmers still get trees for snow protection along lanes.

    Flag
44. 144
    Name: Jason And Sherrill LeBlanc on May 4, 2012

    Comments: Our farm has seen the benefits of the Prairie Shelterbelt Program. The PFRA provides a necessary service for us! Please reconsider this decision. Where will we access trees in large numbers for rural areas if we lose this service?

    Flag
45. 145
    Name: Marc Girard on May 4, 2012

    Comments: How can our government be so short sighted by canceling this program. I am not even a tree hugger and yet can see the environmental impact of such a ludicrous decision.

    Flag
46. 146
    Name: G. Ian Brace on May 4, 2012

    Comments: Currently, less than 70% of our southern prairie is protected by any form of field shelterbelt. It's very fine for Ottawa to dictate policy in their forest environments, but hopefully intelligent minds will succeed where blind politicians rein.

    Flag
47. 147
    Name: Robert Young on May 4, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
48. 148
    Name: Egbert Slomp on May 4, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
49. 149
    Name: Bill & Marie Bill on May 4, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
50. 150
    Name: Lisa Ede on May 4, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag

Page: « ‹ 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 › »