Friday, October 28, 2005


Dear Rosann Wowchuk,

I am deeply concerned that Terminator technology (Genetic Use Restriction Technology or GURTS) is being actively developed and promoted by corporations and that the United Nations de facto moratorium on Terminator at the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) is not strong enough to stop this dangerous technology. I am writing to urge you to establish a national ban on Terminator technology, and to support an international ban on Terminator at the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity.

People all over the world condemn Terminator technology - gene sterilization technology – because of its serious potential impacts for farmers, Indigenous peoples, food security and biodiversity. The technology has no benefits for farmers. Instead, biotechnologists design Terminator to maximize industry profits by preventing farmers from saving and re-using harvested seed. The technology threatens the livelihoods of over 1.4 billion people who depend on farm-saved seeds as their primary seed source.

Seed and biotechnology corporations are promoting the false argument that Terminator could be used to stop unwanted genetic pollution from industry’s genetically modified crops. However, genetic use restriction technology is too complex and unreliable to prevent the movement of genes. Additionally, if commercialized under the guise of a “biosafety” tool to prevent gene flow, Terminator genes would introduce new hazards since they can spread to neighbouring crops via pollen in the first generation. The spreading of sterile genes could result in ecological catastrophe. Furthermore, farmers who save the seeds of contaminated varieties for replanting may find that some of their seeds do not germinate, potentially translating into significant yield losses.

I urge your government to propose and support a strong recommendation prohibiting the field testing and commercialization of Terminator technology when the CBD’s Working Group on Article 8(j) meets January 23-27 in Granada Spain, and when the 8th Conference of the Parties meets in March 20-31 in Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil.

I ask for your support to insure that Canada will disapprove the use of Terminator seeds. I urge you to work towards establishing a national ban on Terminator. I also urge our government delegation attending the March 2006 meeting of the 8th Conference of the Parties to the CBD to support an international ban on Terminator.

I look forward to hearing from you. Please take these steps to prohibit Terminator in order to protect farmer livelihoods, biodiversity and food security in Canada.


[insert your name and address here]

Click on this:

Tuesday, October 25, 2005

The Ban Terminator Campaign

Greenpeace and the Ban Terminator Campaign revealed today that new patents have been granted in both Canada and Europe for a Terminator technology owned jointly by US seed corporation Delta and Pine Land and the United States Department of Agriculture.

The patents were granted on October 11, 2005 and October 5, 2005, respectively. The move confirms the greatest fears of farmers, Indigenous peoples groups, and social movements around the world that Terminator technology is once again being pushed towards commercialization.

Terminator seeds are genetically engineered to be sterile after first harvest so farmers cannot use the seed in the next season. It would force farmers to buy seed every year; and would also concentrate even more power in the hands of major biotechnology and seed corporations. Intensive global uproar has kept the technology from being field-tested or commercialized, but companies are now pushing for acceptance.

“These new patents confirm that corporations are once again actively pursuing Terminator seeds and an international ban on Terminator is urgently needed,” said Lucy Sharratt, Coordinator of the new global Ban Terminator Campaign.

New fears that governments and corporations are working together to push Terminator were first confirmed in February 2005 when the Canadian government shocked the world by trying to overturn the international de facto moratorium on Terminator that exists at the United Nations under the Convention on Biological Diversity. Uproar from Canadian and international groups kept the moratorium alive. To address this crisis, the National Farmers Union (NFU) and other Canadian-based groups, including ETC Group, Inter Pres and USC Canada, initiated a global Ban Terminator Campaign (

“The Canadian government must immediately stop promoting corporate Terminator seeds and protect the rights of farmers by banning the technology,” said Terry Boehm, Vice-President of the NFU. “Terminator is a great threat to farmers in developed and developing countries. The
Canadian government should be ashamed to be associated with this technology. Terminator is an attempt to achieve biologically what the government has been unable to do legislatively.”

“Corporate control of seeds is the only goal of Terminator,” said Eric Darier, Greenpeace Canada campaigner. “The corporate attempt to greenwash Terminator by saying it can help prevent genetic contamination is false as the technology itself is not 100% reliable, and it can nevertheless contaminate the environment and threaten biodiversity. This is an outrageous strategy to commercialize a dangerous, anti-farmer and non-ecological technology. Patents on Terminator can and must be denied for the public good.”

The Ban Terminator Campaign is urging governments around the world to establish national bans on Terminator and to ban Terminator at the major meeting of the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity, March 20-31, 2006 in Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil.

Friday, October 21, 2005

George W. Bush may face charges in Canada for torture

Lawyers Against the War (LAW) is claiming a victory in its battle to have George W. Bush face charges in Canada for torture.

The charges stem from the notorious cases of torture practiced by U.S. forces in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. They were laid on the occasion of George W. Bush’s controversial visit to Canada in November 2004. The charges were laid under sections of the Canadian Criminal Code enacted pursuant to the United Nations Torture Convention which requires extra-territorial jurisdiction to be exercised against officials, even Heads of State, who authorize or are otherwise responsible for torture.

On Monday, the Supreme Court of BC quashed an order banning publication of everything having to do with the charges imposed when they were first laid. In a secret hearing, held December 6th 2004 in B.C. Provincial Court, the charges against Bush were rejected on the basis of arguments by the Attorney General of British Columbia that the visiting president was shielded from prosecution by diplomatic immunity. A ban on publication of anything to do with the proceedings was also imposed.

The secrecy, the immunity claim, and the ban are vigorously opposed by LAW, who appealed all aspects of the decision.

On Monday, Justice Satanove of the Supreme Court of British Columbia quashed the ban on publication after government lawyers failed to come up with any argument to defend it. The British Columbia Civil Liberties Association had intervened on the side of LAW against the ban.

“This is a very important victory”, said Gail Davidson, who laid the charges and, along with Howard Rubin, argued the case for LAW, “because it ensures that the proceedings will be scrutinized by people in Canada and throughout the world, to make sure that the law is applied fairly and properly and, above all, to make sure that Bush doesn’t get away with torture.”

“The American legal system seems incapable of bringing him to justice and there are no international courts with jurisdiction. So it’s up to Canada to enforce the law that everybody has signed on to but nobody else seems willing to apply.”

The next hearing in the case will take place on November 25th 2005, at 10:00 a.m. at the B.C. Supreme Court, 800 Smithe Street, Vancouver, B.C., when government lawyers have said they will argue that the case is no longer “moot” because the Attorney General of Canada has not yet consented to the prosecution. Toronto law professor Michael Mandel, co-chair of LAW, calls this argument bogus: “He’s still guilty of torture, he’s still on the loose and we still have our obligations under the UN Convention to bring torturers to justice.”

Thursday, October 20, 2005


Re: Stop Destructive Dragging at Home and on the High Seas

The Right Honourable Paul Martin, P.M.
House of Commons
Wellington Street
Ottawa ON K1A 0A6

Dear Prime Minister:

I am writing to urge you to put your strong words into action and stop the rape of the world's oceans.

It has come to my attention that Canada has a historic opportunity to take leadership at the United Nations and support a moratorium on high seas dragging this November. On both the east and west coast of Canada, there is increasing evidence of the destruction of sensitive ecosystems by dragging, which is in great need of your attention.

The worldwide scientific evidence that dragging is by far the most destructive fishing method can no longer be ignored by the Canadian government. With this in mind I ask you to acknowledge dragging as the most destructive fishing method, and take urgent concrete measures to restrict dragging activities both at home and on the high seas. Specifically,
  1. Support the U.N. General Assembly resolution calling for a moratorium on high seas trawling.
  2. Protect sensitive ecosystems from dragging and effect a transition to more sustainable gear types within Canadian waters.
This issue requires your leadership both at the United Nations, and within our domestic waters. I ask you to move from words to action.

[your name and address]

The open letter to Trish Jordan and Monsanto

Dear Ms. Jordan,

Glyphosate-based herbicides are important tools for many farmers, so any information about potential problems is important. All research is of interest. On September 29, 2005, the Western Producer reported on a study conducted by publicly-funded Agriculture Canada researchers that found a link between glyphosate herbicides and a costly plant disease called fusarium. The Agriculture Canada study concludes that "previous glyphosate formulation application was the only crop production factor that was significantly associated with higher fusarium head blight levels every year of the study" and that there was "statistically significant and consistent association between previous glyphosate formulation application and fusarium head blight development in spring wheat throughout our 4-year study conducted in producers' fields." Despite calls from Agriculture Canada scientists for more research on the issue, you make the claim, in that same Western Producer article, that there is no need for the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) to take any further action and no need for further research. You go on to make the following statement: "They [The National Farmers Union] can throw out this study and we can probably throw 50 others back." The purpose of this letter is to issue a public challenge to you and your employer to "throw 50 others back." You have made this statement, which would lead readers to think that there are 50 other studies on the issue. OK. Let's see them. If you do not place "50 other studies" on the table in the next couple of weeks, then readers everywhere will be forced to conclude that your "studies" are no more than a figment of your own imagination designed to mislead the government and the public. You have made a statement regarding scientific fact; this is your chance to back it up.

Yours truly,
Terry Boehm
Vice-President National Farmers Union

Friday, October 14, 2005


Not the bomb-in-the-pocket stuff, which is terrorism, whatever name it tires to dignify itself with; not the social-Darwinist economic "libertarianism" of the far right; but anarchism, as prefigured in early Taoist thought, and expounded by Shelley and Kropotkin, Goldman and Goodman. Anarchism's principal target is the authoritarian State (capitalist or socialist), its principal moral-practical theme is co-operation (solidarity, mutual aid). It is the most idealistic, and to me the most interesting, of all political theories.
- Ursula K. Le Guin

What is an anarchist? One who, choosing, accepts the responsibility of choice.
- from Ursula K. Le Guin's "The Day Before the Revolution"

Monday, October 10, 2005

Glyphosate and fusarium

An article by several Saskatchewan crop scientists in the latest issue of a scholarly journal proves there is a clear correlation between the application of glyphosate herbicides and increased incidence of fusarium head blight in wheat.

The National Farmers Union (NFU) says this research suggests glyphosate-resistant crops are therefore contributing to the spread of a disease which is costing western Canadian farmers hundreds of millions of dollars in lost yields and markets.

NFU President Stewart Wells issued a letter to Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) Pesident François Guimont earlier this week calling on the CFIA to "immediately stop approvals of additional glyphosate-resistant cultivars, including glyphosate-resistant alfalfa, and re-evaluate the approval of glyphosate-resistant varieties currently on the market until all the fusarium links are clearly understood."

The article, entitled "Crop Production Factors Associated with Fusarium Head Blight in Spring Wheat in Eastern Saskatchewan" was published in Crop Science, the journal of the Crop Science Society of America, on August 26, 2005. The research was conducted between 1999 and 2002 and involved samples from 659 crops. Information on agronomic practices used in these fields was also factored into the calculations.

Wells said the NFU was first alerted to the potential link between glyphosate-resistant crops and the increased incidence of fusarium in 2003 by the scientists at the Agriculture Canada Research Station in Swift Current. Since June, 2003, the NFU has repeatedly asked the CFIA to investigate this correlation, but the CFIA has evaded the issue.

"Over the past two years, and as the evidence of a glyphosate herbicide/fusarium link has mounted, the CFIA has adopted a moving target for the burden of proof," stated Wells. "Initially, the CFIA said there was no research on this issue. Then, the CFIA stated it was not aware of any published research. Finally, the CFIA said it was not aware of any peer-reviewed research"

The publication of the research in the most prestigious Crop Science journal in North America meets all these criteria, he stated. "This is another example of the tremendous contribution of Canada's public researchers," concluded Wells. "It is very likely that more research on this subject could save Canadian farmers hundreds of millions of dollars, and on a global scale the benefit would climb into the billions of dollars."

Friday, October 07, 2005


Re: WTO Challenge

Dear Trade Minister Jim Peterson,

Within the next month, a World Trade Organization (WTO) panel is scheduled to rule on the European Union's moratorium on the import of genetically engineered foods. I strongly condemn the Canadian government's decision to support the United States' challenge of the European Union's moratorium. Canada must relinquish its involvement in this shameful partnership with the United States and actively work to ensure that the WTO panel ruling respects EU policy.


Thursday, October 06, 2005

Email message #1


Dear Sir,

I am writing to inform you that I am aware of Ascendant Exploration's actions in Intag, Ecuador and that I support the resistance to mining there.

I am aware of the multiple techniques that are being used to try and break this resistance. They include:

  • mail theft

  • the interruption and monitoring of phone and email services

  • a campaign of disinformation and lies against community leaders and organizations

  • intimidation, including armed guards, death threats, and violence against property

  • political corruption, illegal land claims, and illegal concessions.

I am also aware of the false and malicious libel suits that have been proposed against Periodico Intag in reaction to their attempts to educate the Intag community and also against Polibio Perez and Jose Serrano. I request Ascendant Exploration terminate these unfounded libel suits. I protest your appointment of General Cesar Bolivar Villaics to your board as "Community Relations and Political Liason." General Villaics has a past history widely denounced by the Ecuadorian human rights community. His threatening posture at community meetings causes me grave concern for the safety of the people of Intag, and shows Ascendant Exploration's willingness to use violence to break community resistance. Such willingness was demonstrated on Saturday, November 13th when a pair of bodyguards assaulted anti-mining activists and destroyed their property (photographic equipment) in Garcia Moreno during a speech by General Villaics.

Community resistance to mining is much larger than you may think. An active solidarity campaign in the United States and Asia is underway. It seeks to expose the actions of Ascendant Exploration to the investor community, such as the Toronto Stock Exchange, as well as those mining companies Ascendant Exploration hopes to sell its concessions to. Additionally, this campaign is committed to the defense of the rights of the people of Intag against the unethical actions of Ascendant Exploration. I pledge my support to the people of Intag to hold you and your company accountable for your actions.

I request that Ascendant Exploration terminate its business activities in Intag before you inflict further harm upon the honorable and hardworking members of the Intag community.

In Solidarity with the people of Intag,

Email Message #2


The Honourable Pierre Pettigrew
Minister of Foreign Affairs Canada
Office of the Minister of Foreign Affairs
125 Sussex Drive
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, K1A 0G2

The Honourable R. John Efford
Minister of Natural Resources Canada
Natural Resources Canada
580 Booth Street, 21st Floor, Rm: C7-1
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, K1A 0E4

The Honourable David L Emerson
Minister, Industry Canada
235 Queen Street
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, K1A 0H5

Dear Honourable Minister,

I am writing to urge you to adopt the recommendations contained in the Fourteenth Report of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade and to take action around a number of urgent cases involving Canadian mining companies operating abroad. I am deeply concerned about the social and environmental impacts of Canadian mining companies overseas and I find it disturbing that the Government of Canada has thus far failed to take meaningful action to address this obvious problem. The above-mentioned Parliamentary report provides you with an opportunity to demonstrate leadership on this important issue.

In late June, the Parliament’s Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade adopted a report stating that they were “concerned that Canada does not yet have laws to ensure that the activities of Canadian mining companies in developing countries conform to human rights standards, including the rights of workers and of indigenous peoples.” The report argues that “more must be done to ensure that Canadian companies… conduct their activities in a socially and environmentally responsible manner and in conformity with international human rights standards.” Among other things, the report urges the Government of Canada to:

* Condition Canadian support “on companies meeting clearly defined corporate social responsibility and human rights standards...”

* “Establish clear legal norms in Canada to ensure that Canadian companies and residents are held accountable when there is evidence of environmental and/or human rights violations associated with the activities of Canadian mining companies.” And;

* “Work with like-minded countries to integrate and mainstream international human rights standards in the work of international financial institutions (IFIs) such as the World Bank…”

The Standing Committee has requested “a comprehensive government response to this Report” and it is my understanding that the Government is currently deciding how to proceed. I am writing to express my support for the recommendations outlined in the report. I want to urge you to ensure that these recommendations are adopted by the Government of Canada and I would like you to please provide me with information outlining the steps that you are personally taking to ensure that this occurs.

The committee’s report also calls on the Government to “conduct an investigation of any impact of TVI Pacific’s Canatuan mining project in Mindanao on the indigenous rights and human rights of people in the area and on the environment, and table a report on this investigation in Parliament within 90 days.” I support this recommendation and I believe that the Government should also call on TVI to suspend all activities pending the outcome of this investigation. I also strongly believe that the Government should launch investigations into the activities of Ascendant Copper Corporation’s Junin project in Ecuador and Glamis Gold’s Marlin Mine in Guatemala, and call on these companies to suspend their activities pending the outcome of the Government’s investigation. I would like you to please provide me with information on what your office is doing to ensure that the problems associated with these projects are addressed.

Finally, I am appalled that the World Bank and other international financial institutions have not yet made clear and binding commitments to uphold international human rights standards. Please provide me with information on what you are doing to ensure that these institutions are no longer able to ignore international law.

As you know, more money is raised for the global mining industry in Canada than in any other country in the world and more than half of the world’s mining companies list their shares on Canadian capital markets. Canada has a responsibility to develop mechanisms to hold these companies accountable for their actions overseas. This is a responsibility that the Government of Canada has failed to embrace. I hope that the above-mentioned Parliamentary report will prove to be an opportunity to address this glaring and damaging failure.

Thank you,

Tuesday, October 04, 2005

How to

For the following post, I've adapted an action plan for a real organic farm near Guelph, Ontario. While reading this post, I encourage you to consider your own neighbourhoods for the processes. Here goes:

1. Complete an Ecological Impact Assessment.

2. Organise the existing residents of [your neighbourhood], the community garden renters group (not the Community Shared Agriculture group, yet), and workshop site, to not only co-operatively grow food, but to make and repair things, share tools, exchange surpluses, spend some leisure time, and hold meetings. Work co-operatively and share crops as a team.
a. Initiate resident-controlled co-housing co-operative to ensure permanent affordability of housing on site.
b. Hire professionals: facilitator and a retrofitter

3. a. Option 1. Small-scale poultry and possibly aquaculture (possibly referring to Ireland, S. 1997) production collective. This collective could collect and trade useful waste for the whole co-operative to use.
Option 2. Initiate small-scale on-site textile project (Darroll, 2002).
b. Possibly integrate the on-site bakery as a second collective. (A bakery will be necessary.)
c. "Gleaning" operation whereby people living in the area, i.e., organic farmers, give permission for some of their surplus to be harvested by the co-operative group.

4. Integrate the Community Shared Agriculture at this point. This phase may initiate the redistribution of surpluses to [your city]-based food bank, mental health institution, etc.

5. Encourage low-income, unemployed, aged and disadvantaged people to become involved in the community garden and workshop co-operative (to provide the things they need) including company and activity. Organise recycling and renovation of furniture, toys, clothing, building materials and compostable material.
a. It may be appropriate at this stage to initiate the Common Hall, or Common House, where people could engage in craft-making and shared meals.
b. Kiloh (1995) suggests that the single-parent family is perhaps the greatest beneficiary of the closer (ecovillage) community.

6. Analysis of export and import dependence. What products are being "imported" that could reasonably be produced on site? What collectives might be set up to produce locally the things needed?

7. The ecovillage will include the group of co-operative members who are participating in the localized, small-scale, zero-growth economy at this stage.

8. Permacultural edible landscape development: good water catchments, sewage recycling, home gardens, community gardens, and especially many trees to produce fuel, timber, food, and craft materials (Hu 1998)
a. Smaller fruit trees are used on the south side of houses where they are most protected and can provide shading of windows in the summer.
b. Species chosen either for their food production capabilities or for their appropriateness as 'native' species.

9. People can work for each other and trade without money, possibility of a LET System at this stage. It is critical to the development of a sustainable small-scale economy, that currency and firms do not become part of the economic model. Even small firms could result in unemployment.

10. Establish non-market exchanges of locally produced basic necessities.

11. Consider what collectives might be set up to provide mutual services on a non-profit basis. Consider local energy production, food production, child minding.

12. What collective activities can be organized to provide for the ecovillage some of the goods and services it needs? Can some energy sources, e.g., biogas, be built and maintained? Are monthly "ecovillage improvement" work days a possibility? Do not raise money to hire a contractor, these jobs can be done by the ecovillage co-operative members.

13. Emphasize the importance of living simply, making things yourself, having home gardens, repairing and reusing. Encourage more household production, e.g., bottling and sewing.

14. One of the collectives could study ways of reducing living costs at this stage, e.g., alternative energy sources such as solar panels, regular energy audits and retrofits, a green building code, wind energy, and/or low energy lighting and appliances, and structural rehabilitation and reuse such as domestic hot water preheat, solar hot water, heat recovery ventilation, recycled heat exchange, and/or rooftop gardening.

15. Develop craft collectives to increase local production of many items. Organise classes, skill sharing, display days, local sources of material for pottery, basket making, weaving, etc.

16. One collective could focus on the possibilities for providing local and cheap entertainment. Concentrate on drawing local talent to these activities.

17. Set up a work co-ordination committee to grapple with the problem of ensuring that all who need some work and some cash income have access to these. Does the study of the ecovillage's imports indicate new collectives that could be set up? Help people live more simply.

18. Give high priority to the need for continuing education, for increasing and maintaining understanding and commitment to the ecovillage. Explain to local people the purpose of the project, reasons why it is important to pioneer a path others can take toward a sustainable world order.

19. Work out procedures for unifying and co-ordinating the ecovillage. There should be a forum or mechanism whereby people can keep in mind the overall pattern of ecovillage development and evaluate particular ideas in relation to a vision statement. It is not ideal if many different groups go their own seperate ways trying to do things that are not carefully integrated into the overall strategy. Scarce resources are best focused on selected tasks with all clearly aware of how it fits into the basic vision. It is most important to get to the stage where the whole ecovillage consciously and deliberately takes control of its own development and determines to work hard at the process.

20. There must be much careful, critical and altruistic thought analysing the ecovillage's functioning and needs. Aim to have eventually developed a climate of solidarity and citizenship and clear awareness that the people of the ecovillage will willingly and constantly devote energy to keeping the ecovillage's community, economy, culture, and ecology in good shape.

21. It is crucial that the ecovillagers understand that their community will not survive unless they make considerable effort to support it, by making voluntary contributions to working bees and projects.

22. It is most important to understand from the start the goal is not to find an alternative path to conventional affluence for the ecovillage. Living standards in dollar terms will certainly fall. The goal is to provide sufficient and satisfactory standards to build community and solidarity, and above all ensure that the ecovillage can survive and is secure in the knowledge that it can control its own fate and continue to produce for itself most things it needs, regardless of what happens on national and international economies.

Referenced Material

Hu, D. and R. Wang. 1998. Exploring eco-construction for local sustainability: an eco-village case study in China. Ecological Engineering 11(1-4): 167-176
Ireland, S. 1997. Aquaculture: the Chan way. Western Fisheries: 33-35
Kiloh, G. 1995. Armour Park eco-village prairie settlement for a sustainable future (Saskatchewan). The University of Manitoba. 141 pp
Trainer, T. 2000. Where are we, where do we want to be, how do we get there? Democracy and Nature 6(2): 267-286

Sunday, October 02, 2005

Cottage plan threatens sacred site: natives

By Carol Sanders

A proposal to develop cottage lots on Crown land on the Winnipeg River has neighbours and some members of the aboriginal community up in arms.

The area near Silver Falls is home to age-old rock placements or petroforms considered sacred in aboriginal culture, said area resident John Markert. The regional advisor to the province's historic resources branch said the planning district and the province have ignored petitions and letters expressing concern about the development of close to 30 cottage lots southeast of Pine Falls.

"It'd be just like if the government decided to build on a site of a church and not ask the congregation, and all of a sudden the congregation sees their place of prayer damaged," said Caroline Bruyere, a Sagkeeng First Nation member.

Native elders have toured the site and written to the province vouching for its historic and religious significance, said Markert. The petroforms were usually placed in remote areas and serve as reminders of the aboriginal teachings given to the first people by the Creator.

Elder Don Cardinal said the Silver Falls rock formations are part of a much larger petroform that has great historical and spiritual significance, and should be left as it is.

Bruyere said she hopes the province takes the elders' opinions seriously.

"It's part of my cultural history, part of my faith," Bruyere said. "They should have the same concern and respect."

Conservation Minister Stan Struthers said that the cottage lots won't be developed if it's found to be a sacred site. He encouraged people with concerns about the development to attend a meeting in the RM of Alexander on Oct. 5.

Markert said other historical sites along the Winnipeg River have been destroyed by development and the province has an opportunity in this case to preserve a significant one.

"That was our highway," said Bruyere. "There were certain stops where you'd do ceremonies for your travel, for your well-being and for a good hunting season and a good fishing season," she said.